TOY STORY 3 (merged thread) - Page 4

Bambi II: The Revenge
This time it's personal!

Bambi II? I guess Hugh Hefner isn't as old as I thought.

Seriously though, if it wasn't a poster I respected, I would think of the report of Bambi II as an appalling, in poor taste, joke. Perfectly fitting for Eisner.

.

Actually, I'm quite glad Disney will be attempting this. Something that's a tenth as good as the Pixar originals will still be 1000000000000000000000000000 times better than the dross that Disney have been producing of their own accord in the past few years.

You are assuming that Disney could even get it up to that level. I like the first 2 because they weren't about Andy, he was just a vehicle to drive the story they were about Andy's toys and the reality that they live in, welcoming a new toy for instance. We don't need to explore human relationships like Andy needing a father, or what have you and TS 3 become the Brady Bunch of these films by basically taking the plot of that show, and telling it using toys instead of people.

As for Bambi 2, I'm still waiting for Snow White 1.5 and Cinderella 3-16, I just kicked your ass with my glass.

A man can dream can't he?

Well sure, but since this is Disney maybe you should wish upon a star instead.

I can see Tom Hanks passing on this film, but is Tim Allen's career really in any shape for him to be passing on guaranteed work?

It's really doesn't matter which actor turns it down, for me to even consider seeing this, both would have to be on-board.

Here's a new article concerning Toy Story 3:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145561,00.html

Some notable quotes:

I can only hope it's true. Pixar screwed up and signed a deal with the devil to get where they are today, but I don't want to see their work dragged through the mud the way Walt's has been. Hopefully the coming replacement of Eisner will result in someone who will be able to work something out. Pixar wants a lot, but I'm willing to bet they'd settle for less. That's how bargaining works Maybe that while Pixar maintains the rights to all their movies and characters, but for the ones they've already done with Disney, Disney gets right of first refusal on distribution on future sequels with those characters (ie, Pixar can make and distribute Toy Story 3 without Disney, but when distribution time comes, Disney can pick it up before anybody else is allowed in the market, and other studios are allowed in only if Disney refuses). A reduced cut of the gross of the movie, but not a flat distribution fee, maybe 25%. As for control over when their movies hit theaters, eh, I don't think it's a big deal. I'm sure they'd be willing to listen to input from Disney, they just don't want to be forced into something. As successful as The Incredibles was, I do think it would have done better still at the BO had it opened in the summer.

The quote I did find most interesting however was It says a lot that people aren't willing to work with Disney because they don't want to piss off Pixar. Pixar's brand name must be strong indeed if people are willing to turn down the mother of all animation studios for fear of offending a relative upstart.

It's a good guess it's an unspoken taboo for any director to sign on - it would be considered treason.

I must say that at least James Cameron had good things to say about Terminator 3 being done without him. Quite a different situation than this, though.

There has been wallstreet speculation that Jobs' offer to Disney was intentionally unacceptable to weaken Eisner's position as CEO and perhaps give an opening for Jobs to take his position down the road by offering to bring a "good" Pixar deal with him.

BB

I honestly don't think Jobs wants Disney. He's always been about being the quirky young up-start.

From the BBC

Another quote from the IMDb:



Okay, that's it, time to sell my Disney stock...

Seriously, when you're saying THAT about building a whole new studio to make SEQUELS to properties that SOMEONE ELSE DEVELOPED, you're truly enjoying your ride on the Titanic.

To do a Toy Story without Pixar would be like making an Indiana Jones adventure without Steven Spielberg.

It's like making PB & J when you have no bread.

It's like... OK, you get the point.

To me it's a simple and logical series of opinions:

Just LOOK at what Disney considers "worthwhile" sequels:

101 Dalmatians 2: Patch's London Adventure
Aladdin and the King of Thieves
Atlantis: Milo's Return
Beauty and the Beast: Belle's Magical Adventure
Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas
Buzz Lightyear of Star Command
Cinderella 2: Dreams Come True
The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2
Lady and the Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure
The Lion King 1 1/2
The Lion King 2: Simba's Pride
The Little Mermaid 2: Return from the Sea
Mulan 2
The Return of Jafar
Stitch: The Movie
Tarzan & Jane

...to say nothing of the inevitably pointless Bambi 2 that's impending.

Mr. Cook, you guys "fell on your sword" years ago when you started whoring the most beloved the Disney "properties" in the name of a quick buck. If Disney is to once again become a true beacon of respectable family entertainment, you should perhaps get rid of those on your production team who adhere to the Friday the 13th school of sequel-mongering.

I truly shudder to think of what Mr. Disney would think of these atrocious DTV sequels. But hey, he's dead and there's a lot of money to be made, right?

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that Disney has not EARNED the right to create a Toy Story sequel. Sure, the contracts may say otherwise, but contracts are not what create wonderful movies. Heart and care and talent and craftsmanship are what create wonderful movies, and Pixar has Disney trumped in that department by, oh, about a trillion percent. Pixar is today what Disney was in the 40s, 50s, and 60s. And Disney can't STAND IT.

Heart and care and talent and craftsmanship are what create wonderful movies, and Pixar has Disney trumped in that department by, oh, about a trillion percent.

It's not craftsmanship -- Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Atlantis, Dinosaur, Lilo and Stitch etc. are beautifully designed and rendered films...it's the screenplay and the storytelling that has cut Disney off at the knees. Pixar has three Oscar nominations now for Best Original Screenplay. Disney's creative culture has been too compromised and hamstrung by executive corporate meddling to put together a movie with a decent screenplay, and that's where the problem is. I'd argue that for over a decade now, Disney has been making animated movies with some great individual scenes, but with rare exception, they have not been making truly great animated films, and the problem lies in the writing and the executive meddling.

I don't think Brad Bird received memos from Steve Jobs telling him to put in more "songs and humour for the kids" into The Incredibles, I don't think Andrew Stainton received executive directives telling him to cut poignant emotional moments out of Finding Nemo because toddlers got antsy during a test screening.

It's not the craftsmanship, its the corporate culture at Disney. Too many cooks who can't cook fiddling with the recipie, too many executive weeds in the garden. If the corporate culture doesn't change at Disney, then it doesn't matter what medium they work in -- hand-drawn or CGI -- the end result is still going to be problematic movies with no real sense of themselves.

Hello all---

Toy Story 2 remains one of my all-time favorite films. This whole thread just makes me sad. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be for the Pixar crew to have to hear about this news and have absolutely no control over their creations at all.

I understand the fact that Pixar signed the contract with Disney, and it has to live with that mistake. But it's just too bad that both sides can't reach some kind of agreement. Pixar shouldn't ask for the whole world, and Disney shouldn't offer only Greenland [no offense to Greenland, I'm talking metaphors!]. Their business relationship has led to so many huge successes over the years...it's just a shame that it will likely end.

As for whether or not Hanks and Allen will participate in TS3 and whether their presence will make or not make the film, who knows? Disney has publicly taken a pretty strong position on this issue. Ultimately, kids don't know who does the voices on a cartoon---they're focused on the whole package. I doubt Disney would mind changing voice actors for soundalikes, which would help on the budget end as well. The clear message in all of this is that it's a business, and this [replacing Hanks and Allen] would be just another in a series of decisions that support that message.

The real key, as we all know, is whether John Ratzenberger is present...!

mattl

Here's some really tragic news from the Pixar camp. I came across it through this Live Journal entry:



Broke my heart to read this news. This man desgined Jessie, Dot and Boo?? This is the guy who created all those amazingly cute little school-fishies in Finding Nemo? THIS guy designed WATERNOOSE! And those hilarious little flippy circus bugs!

A true artist in every sense of the word, and an absolute tragedy to have him die so young.

I'll be at a Super Bowl party tomorrow, and I'll be toasting my first beer to you, Mr. Lee.

(The second beer is dedicated to Ossie Davis and the third goes to John Vernon.) Sad week.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060124/20060124006101.html?.v=1

With Disney acquiring Pixar again, will this project continue? Be scraped? Be re-worked with the Pixar magic? I hope to God that it doesn't continue without Pixar's involvement.

Mr. Hanks, Mr. Allen, this all depends on you two, if you don't go, I don't go.

Amen to that.

There wouldn't be any reason for them to make Toy Story 3 without Pixar now that they are back in the fold.

I don't think that's a terrible idea, but I think the first two films already used the great tragedies and perils that a toy would encounter. The first film dealt with being replaced by a newer toy, getting lost and being destroyed by a sadistic kid with fireworks. The second dealt with the inevitability of a child outgrowing their toys and the horrors of "mint in mint package" collectability, and it even touched on the reality of mass-production vs. individuality. What more can you do with toys? If that spoiler is correct, it's just a variation on the "new toy" idea from the first film.

I'm sure if they put their heads together they'd find something. I'd rather them make a sequel for a good reason instead of just making one to have it exist. They even say on the new edition of toy story 2 that disney was pushing for a sequel and until they thought about toys as collector's items they weren't really interested because there'd be no theme to the film.

I'd say a better direction would be for Pixar to sit down and really think about a good idea for a 3rd movie, and not just a plot decent enough to write 90 minutes around.

There's a story in Wednesday's Wall St Journal that says John Lasseter kept the discussions/negotiations going between Pixar and Disney, even when Jobs and Eisner were very publicly feuding, in part b/c it made Lasseter sick to think Disney "owned" all the Pixar characters to do crappy sequels as they wished.

So the work on Toy Story 3 (which I'm sure Lasseter will see to it is squelched, or done ONLY if there's a storyline up to Pixar standards) indirectly made the Pixar/Disney deal happen.

Toy Story 3 CANCELLED

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=12889

"According to a poster at Animation Nation, Catmull and Lasseter "announced to Feature Animation employees [Tuesday] that the 'Toy Story 3' production will end effectively [Tuesday]. They said that sequels should only be made if there is a really great story that demands it, and should be the domain of those who created the original film."

YEA!!!!!

For some reason this makes me feel like Pixar's movies will suffer from this. Disney's animated features of late have been down right horrible! Personally I think Pixars films some of the best for repeat viewing and was looking forward to pixar movies sans Disney.

This "announcement" is a damn shame.

I have to disagree. Pixar's Lasseter is set to be put in charge of Disney animation, which can only be a good thing for both Pixar and Disney features. (Although I agree about the Disney features of late being poor.)