Slashdot Mirror
Pixar Tron Remake?
RAZ was among several folks who wrote in to tell us about a ZDNet article that
talks about Pixar and Tron. No official comment from the studio, but there still are rumors floating about that Pixar may be redoing that classic little piece of disney sci fi. And I just got the DVD of the original ;)
This is correct. Pixar is about creating endearing stories, not re-hashing older films already exist as classics. However. . .
Here's the truth.
Toy Story II will be released in November. Monsters Inc. is the next movie in production( summer of 2001). In pre-production is a series of three films. The original characters will not be the main protagonists, but will be woven into the story. For now, think Lord of the Rings/Star Wars/Blade Runner. This is a HUGE project.
The animators will be training on Monsters Inc. under John Lasseter with new motion capture systems being developed at Pixar. The voices of the actors will be professional actors, but the animation will be done at Pixar's new site currently being built. Steve Jobs is working with Apple (on hardware), NeXt (for software), and within Pixar itself (for Renderman software) to create what will be what they call the "Uber-Renderfarm" (25 times more powerful than what was used on "A Bug's Life"). This will be necessary as all the humans will be computer generated. In fact, Geri's Game was a test to push the human technology further.
I've never been more excited about a project. The pre-production art looks beautiful. The story guys are pumping out some of the most amazingly exciting, heart-warming, and funny stuff I've seen in an epic project like this. And well, we'll just have to wait until 2003 to see the newest exploits of the son of son of Tron!
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Does anyone remember Ralph Bashke? Motion capture isn't "toony" enough.
Bruce Perens.
Dreamworks SKG, with a bit of Microsoft backing rushed the inferior Antz to market
To be honest out of 5 people that I know have seen both movies, all but one preferred Antz.
The reason that one didn't like it was mainly because of Woody Allen.
I have never thought that Antz was rushed. It certainly doesn't look it.
"With Tron, a competitor could create another flick in the same genre, also computer animated, and release shortly before."
Thats a big risk to take. Warners have tried to do disney style movies and they really haven't worked. (Mind you I'm getting feed up with Disney retelling the past through their eyes, its why I am glad that the Muppets are no longer in Disneys control). Animations, computer or otherwise, are expensive enough that its probably to risky to try.
Rob
Life's a joke Question is, who's the butt
...when a Pixar spokesperson denies knowlege of it?
Or, are they just keeping the noise level down until they decide whether or not to do it?
The original was great... I would not want to see a remake that just adds more modern animation. On the other hand, I would love to see a well-done sequel. Only, maybe this time they should use more Unix terminology and fewer Burroughs (Unisys) terms!
Geeky modern art T-shirts
A number of TRON cast members went onto work on Babylon-5...TRON was played by Bruce Boxleitner, who also played John Sheriden. Peter Jurasik, Londo Mollari...and knowing the Pixar people (And animators in general), there would bound to be many B-5 References, injokes in a remake of TRON...Let's go de-rez some Shadows!
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
If it's a remake, I wonder if they'll round up the original actors? If it's a sequel...well...I'll be very nervous about what 1990's minds can create. I think a lot of the fun of Tron came from it's early 80's views on computers. They were mysterious and unknown...today it's net this, browser that. Even grandpa has an AOL account to talk with his war buddies 300 miles away.
Just have to see, I guess...:/
-- www.bteg.com | bleh.n3.net | hac47.dhs.org
No, really. I liked the original Tron, though even way back then I knew it wasn't even close to "realistic." I just have this awful feeling that if they were to do a sequel, it'd turn into some horrible mishmash of "Lawnmower Man," "The Net," and a bunch of other movies that were substandard. Computers/+the Net have permeated popular culture far enough to be completely misunderstood by those in the movie business. (Hollywood truth: anyone who knows anything about computers can hack into top-secret NSA databases in less than 5 minutes!)
Or is Pixar going to make a kinder, gentler "The Matrix," with semi-violent heroes in glowing blue suits substituted for ultraviolent heroes in black trenchcoats?
Give a monkey a brain and he'll swear he's the center of the universe.
What are you talking about? Motion capture doesnt reduce the need for animators, it just changes how they do their jobs. Motion capture is great for humans and human-like models, but you cant very well motion capture something with 5 arms and wings, or the waving of a plant in a breeze, or a car etc. All motion capture does for animators is make their job a bit easier, not replace them. And as for not making money on animated films.. tarzan was up there around #1 for cash intake its first weekend if i remember (i didnt pay much attention as i must admit i dont intend to see it.. but that's me) and neither bug's life nor antz (as the most recent fully-computer-animated movies) did very badly either. People dont really care what format a movie is in so long as it's a good watch. South Park was funny as hell, defenitly worth watching, and made out of cardboard cutouts. Alot teens/20ish people might not want to go see a cartoon because they're viewed as 'childish'.. but I dont think computer animated movies suffer the same stigma thanks to cg movies in games and such.
Dreamweaver
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
>Does anyone remember Ralph Bashke? Motion capture isn't "toony" enough.
Bakshi's problem isn't motion capture so much as stock-film-footage capture. COOL WORLD was an enormous imporvement over WIZARDS in this respect, and with motion capture being used in the sense that it is in modern comptuer games (i.e. digitally editing, rather than the cut-and-paste variety), it can be as "real" or as "toony" as need be.
No way.
Pixar is not a special-effects house. Their specialty is telling good stories with 3-D computer-graphic character animation, but telling good stories comes first. They actually spend more time on the script than they do on production. Toy Story and A Bug's Life spent 3 or 4 years in writing. Not until we could like the movie when shown as 100 minutes of shots of black and white pencil-drawn storyboards, with dialogue read by people around the office, would we go into production.
The problem with Tron is that the story isn't good enough - most people just are not interested in that story and the movie can not be saved by better special effects, not that any move can be saved this way. Nerdy folks like you and me might like it, but not a general audience. So, you might see a lesser studio give it a try, like the folks who did Small Soldiers.
Pixar writes its movies in house. They aren't interested in recycling old garbage. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but they could not be as successful as they are if they operated differently.
Again, I'm not a Pixar spokesperson, just someone who worked there for 12 years.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.