TOY STORY 3 (merged thread)

I would be enormously skeptical on any non-Pixar release. Disney's latest animated efforts don't seem to have the same level of craft and charm (from a base storytelling standpoint) to match their Pixar releases. And that doesn't even get into the technical aspects.

They are some very large shoes to fill, and I think I'll maintain guarded interest.

I have no urge to see it, that's all I can say. Without Pixar heading it, forget it.

Di$ney will do anything to make a buck, as this clearly shows. They'll run it into the ground faster than ever.

I think I'm going to be sick.

The real question is whether they can convince the original cast to come in to do the voicework again (and I don't think even Disney would have the balls to go through with a Toy Story 3 without the likes of Tom Hanks and Tim Allen).

If Pixar are not involved, i wont be seeing it. It's as simple as that.

This is a key part of this whole thing.

I saw a basic concept for a Toy Story 3 over at JimHillMedia.com awhile ago dealing with Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) but I don't trust Disney to make this work, it was the creativity of Pixar that made the first 2 work, its like if my friend wrote a paper and put my name on it, that's basically what Disney did. This is not unexpected though, why should Disney be creative when they've got dozens of franchises left to ruin?

Noooo! I like the way the series ended...

I bet Pixar is none too happy. In fact, I can see the bad press already with the movie.

Of course, the selective quote misses this:
As in, there likely aren't any specific plans to actually make another Toy Story sequel. I don't doubt that there are general plans, in much the way Disney constantly evaluates all their properties, but the article reads like they are years from starting, which would then take a couple years to render. The information in the article makes it appear that this guy was asked about Toy Story 3 while promoting The Alamo, and basically answered that if/when it gets done, it will be theatrical rather than video.

I've got no particular love for Disney, but this really looks like much ado about nothing to me.

If Disney were to go ahead and make a sequel without Pixar, I would sit it out. And also, I dont think that Hanks or Allen would do the films if Pixar were not involved, as I believe they were instrumental in the second film even going to theaters in the fisrt place.

Well everyone thinks the disney movies are going to suck without pixar. But maybe pixar will suck without disney. I for one am going to take a wait and see aproach because as far as i'm concerned the best animated films of all time were made by disney. Have they hit a rut? yes. But they have climbed out of ruts before. The late 70's and early 80's were not good, but oliver and company, the little mermaid, beauty and the beast, alladin, and the lion king changed that and as far as i'm concerned the last four are my top 4 of all time. Eventhough the disney pixar colaboration's are also near the top of my list i still will be taking a wait to see first aproach.

I would hope this doesn't get off the ground without Pixar. I love the first two, but without the same talents as the first one, it'll be doomed!

Also would the cast come back? Probably not Hanks and Allen if they want to show their support for Pixar. They could replace them with Jim Hanks (Hank's brother and Woody in the straight to video Buzz movie)and Patrick Warburton (who played Buzz on the animated show). John Ratzenberger seems to have a very good relationship for Pixar so he'll probably want to show his support.

Pixar is its own production company with complete control. Disney just distributed the films. Pixar movies won't suck without Disney. But Disney, being in a rut, will suck without Pixar unless they can pull out of the rut before the contract expires.

Pixar did get an assist from Disney, and a lot of creative talent went across the stream to work for Pixar, and some big wigs with Disney really had input at Pixar.. that having been said, a big part of that is because the animation division at Disney has been absolutely savaged with layoffs and projects shutdown.

I have more faith in Pixar picking up and making good films without Disney input (now that they've hired some of the best away anyway) rather then Disney picking up and starting out.. Disney has no vision or leadership to pick the right people to do it.

Somehow, should disney do TS3 with none of the original cast, new actors, etc. and their own 3D division, I feel it would blemish the rest of the series.. it's the money-sucking approach ala Lion King 1 1/2 and Sleeping Beauty 2; Cinderella 2... except, I fear, this would be closer to "Dinosaur 2"

Well see, I felt like that initially about T3 and Cameron... but I let it go by this time last year, got even pumped about it, gave it a chance, and it ended up being perhaps the best movie I saw last summer. I absolutely loved it and find it a worthy addition.

My point is: I am willing to give TS3 a chance, even if on paper it already looks bad. You just never know. I love the "franchise" enough to be willing to invest a couple bucks and 2 hours of my time, at the risk of a crushing dissapointment.

--
H

>>Well everyone thinks the disney movies are going to suck without pixar. But maybe pixar will suck without disney.>>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Pixar do all the work on planning, writing, character development and voice work on their films, and all Di$ney did was take the ownership of the characters away from them along with releasing the films?

If that's the case, Pixar should buy all their stuff back and release it without Di$ney. One would think they have the money to do so.

That being said, no Pixar on Toy Story 3 = no viewing of Toy Story 3.

I love how people here can see into the future. Yes, Pixar has a string of hits. But so has Disney in the past. See where Pixar is in 30 years and then we'll talk. There's no way to know if Pixar will do well without Disney (I believe they will) but Disney has done well without Pixar. I will wait until I hear all the details and see the finished product. The casting is probably the most important aspect and I would expect Disney to do anything possible to retain the original cast. Toy Story 3 will be Disney's most important project in the coming years.

I think people are taking their hatred towards Disney too seriously and it seems like they are rooting for them to fail. This is unfortunate. I honestly can't imagine a world without Disney so I will be looking forward to Toy Story 3 and hope that it gets the proper treatment it deserves.

Well see, I felt like that initially about T3 and Cameron... but I let it go by this time last year, got even pumped about it, gave it a chance, and it ended up being perhaps the best movie I saw last summer. I absolutely loved it and find it a worthy addition.

that is a good point, and to be honest, i had pretty much the same feelings about T3. I still dont think its ranks up there with Camerons work, how could it, after all, Jonathan Mostow doesnt quite have the same sense of epic granduer to his films as JC does. Still, watching a Toy Story film without the likes of a Tim Allen or Hanks providing the voices, in a major theatrical release, would be disapointing. Even though there is no Toy Story 3 yet, or even likely to be one i'd say, I can't help thinking that this would be a bad idea right from the outset. I hope Disney sees sense.



They probably won't though.

Having two kids, I would have to bet even a half-assed Toy Story release would make money for Disney. I don't think most of the general public would be able to say no to their kids when it comes to a Toy Story movie.

That said, it makes me cringe to think of Toy Story w/o Disney, but I can't imagine the bean counters not ramming it through at some point.

To Disney's credit, they have done some good releases. Lilo and Stitch is one that comes to mind as being very, very good in my book.

Just out of curiosity, why does everybody seem to be assuming that Hanks & Allen wouldn't do a non-Pixar Toy Story; has either of them ever said anything to that effect? Not that they might not be fiercely loyal to Pixar, but I would assume that the deciding factor for Tom Hanks would be the script (and if Disney gave writing duties to, say, Ted Elliot & Terry Rossio or Joss Whedon, it could be a good one), whereas Allen never seemed that picky about what he signed on to.

I was wondering that as well.

--
H

The Terminator 3 comparison is interesting, and could be viewed similarly, but they actually got good talent involved with the production and had Arnold back, which was a step in the right direction. Now if they had gotten Antoine Fuqua to make T3 with someone other than Arnold, no one would have cared.

But Toy Story without Pixar or potentially without the voice talent is just a sad thought, and it is coming on the heels of a long line of Disney annoyance at cashing in.

I can't understand this assumption. I'm sure they agreed to do the first one because it was a Disney movie. I know Allen had a good relationship with Disney so that is why he agreed to it and I'm almost positive that Hanks said he always wanted to be a voice for a Disney cartoon and that Toy Story presented him with this opportunity. Again, Pixar has earned a great reputation but I don't think that they deserve all of the credit. Disney had a lot to do with Pixar's success.

I believe Tim Allen would do it. Look at the line of Disney crap-vehicles he's been in that they cut him a check for (Santa Clause 2?) So, yes, I think if Disney offers him free room & board plus some money, he's there.

Tom Hanks is trickier. He'd be tricky for Pixar to get. He's booked up for the next two years, and his price tag is higher. Besides which, Hanks is a good friend of Steve Jobs, so I don't know if that would factor in at all or not.

That's not really a huge factor with animation, though - without the hassles of makeup and all the physical issues of working on a movie set, a person can come in and record their lines whenever it's convenient, especially since each actor generally records seperately. Folks have, I believe, done this sort of thing on a weekend.

THE BOTTOM LINE is that Disney owns the rights to Toy Story, Monsters Inc., Bug's Life, and Finding Nemo. (Not to mention the two unreleased Disney/Pixar collaboration movies that will be released over the course of the next year-and-a-half.)

It would be the height of naiveté' to expect Disney not to develop these lucrative properties. And, in all probability, anything that Disney does with these films will make money. I, personally, thought that Cinderella II was totally devoid of any artistic merit. (Not to mention the fact that it wasn't even a true movie; just three very loosely connected short stories.) And yet it reportedly was one of the best selling Disney DVD's last year.

So, yeah! I think we can definitely expect to see more movies from Disney featuring these characters and they will make money irrespective of whether or not they're any good.

The fact that Disney retains the rights to these characters by not renewing their deal with Pixar was one of the main reasons it made no economic sense for Disney to continue to try to make a new deal with Pixar work. Reportedly, any such deal would have started with Pixar gaining the rights back for these characters.

It's based on the track record, as of late, of both companies. Pixar, has released consitently good material since their inception. Now, could they release a bad film? Sure, but it's obvious due to their autonomy from Disney (Disney only releases their films and have very little to do with their creation) that their split from Disney will have very little effect on their output.

Disney, on the other hand, has been struggling with their animation division. Their last several releases have underperformed, and their few animated successes from the past several years have been almost exclusively from Pixar. That's where the fear comes from.

Yes, Disney has a long and distinguished history, but the current management isn't honing that tradition as well as they have in the past. I think all of the concerns are valid.

Pathetic! Disney deserves to be in the creative toilet they are in and this will cinch it for sure.
How could they, but this is afterall the same company, that bastardized Peter Pan and Cinderella. Is there anything they wouldnt do to make a buck.
The first two Toy Storys were good because of the scripts that appealed to both young and old. I have a feeling this will appeal to the lowest common denominator and ruin the name of the franchise.

I want the head of the person who greenlit this?