What's new

TOY STORY 3 (merged thread) (1 Viewer)

Brennan Hill

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Dec 10, 1998
Messages
187
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.
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
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.
 

Sean Moon

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
2,041
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.
 

Neil M

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
240


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.
 

Chris

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 4, 1997
Messages
6,788
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.
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
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.
 

Joseph Bolus

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 4, 1999
Messages
2,779
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.
 

Chad R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 14, 1999
Messages
2,183
Real Name
Chad Rouch


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.
 

Mikel_Cooperman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2001
Messages
4,183
Real Name
Mikey
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?
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
Uh, Mikel, no-one's greenlit this yet. People are getting their panties in a bunch over some pretty innocuous comments here.
 

David Rogers

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 15, 2000
Messages
722
Woody and Buzz are dead. They live now only in our memories.

Eff Di$ney. Eff them right in the ear.

The sadest part of this is most of the idiot general audience will go see Toy Story 3 unless Pixar or someone else manages to get the issues behind the Pixar characters into the mainstream news cycles. The worst part is the farce known as TS3 will probably make over 100mil if all they do is exactly copy the existing character models and put together 90minutes of 'story'. If they have to replace the voices I'd bet lower, but still probably decent paycheck.

NOONE has standards anymore. Modern corporate America, at it's finest. Suck the soul just for a buck. But hey, the quarterly returns look good, right?

There's *MORE* to life than the gd quarterly returns people.
 

Galen_V

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
352

I think that either the day of or the day after the Pixar split, Disney did announce production of Toy Story 3.
 

Mike Williams

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 3, 2003
Messages
1,019
i will not spend one penny on any movie that continues Pixar created characters without Pixar's animation team. That is just Disney trying to capitalize on characters without Pixar's involvement and I really hope it bites them square in the ass.
 

Casey Trowbridg

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2003
Messages
9,209
In an article over at JimHillMedia.com there was a Disney press release talking about stuff that was in the production pipeline and Toy Story 3 was mentioned. How far along it is in the pipeline is anyone's guess so this isn't just some idal chatter.
 

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
24,231
Location
Gulf Coast
Real Name
Tony D.
wow, is that really necessary?

i just dont get all this venom towards disney.

i look forward to another movie featuring some of my favorite movie characters.
i dont have the skill to see the future so i wont say i know for sure it will stink.
i like to reserve judgement 'till after i see a movie.
 

Thomas Newton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Messages
2,303
Real Name
Thomas Newton
Let's see.

It wasn't Pixar whose lobbyists were helping Senator Hollings to draft his "mandatory electronic soldiers for the entertainment industry in every PC" proposal. (SSSCA was about as anti-American as they come.)

It wasn't Pixar who backed Circuit City's DIVX (and, more recently, self-destructing DVDs).

It wasn't Pixar who released thrown-together "direct-to-video" sequels to original, classic movies. (Toy Story 2 was as good as, or better than, the original movie.)

It's not Pixar who draws extremely heavily on the public domain, while doing everything possible to keep the stuff they produce from, in turn, enriching the public domain.

It was not Pixar that caused the Disney/Pixar relationship to fall apart. It was Disney's poor treatment of Pixar ("no counting Toy Story 2 for you!"), and its unrealistic expectation that it could continue to cut itself an outsized piece of the pie that Pixar earned.

It's not Pixar whose management has lost the support of Roy Disney. (Isn't he related to a guy by the name of "Walt"? ;))
 

Joseph Bolus

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 4, 1999
Messages
2,779

First of all, Pixar knew that Toy Story 2 would not satisfy the terms and agreements that had been outlined by the current (extant) contract between the two companies for the mutually agreed upon number of original movies. When Toy Story 2 was being developed as a straight-to-video property and it was then decided to release it instead theatrically, Pixar had the leverage at that time to work out an amendment to the original contract such that this particular sequel would count toward their commitment. They failed to do so. (Speculation has it that even then Pixar wanted to also amend the clause regarding the ownership of the original Toy Story characters as well; at that point there was really no economic incentive for Disney to consider the proposed amendment. If Pixar had agreed to a lower rights fee for Toy Story 2 in return for both a percentage of ownership in the original characters and a waiver in the number of required movies, then they possibly could have struck a deal. But "it takes two to tango" as they say, and Pixar was bringing nothing of interest for Disney to the table. Ergo, Toy Story 2 did not count toward their movie development commitment.)

Secondly, Pixar has done quite well under the current agreement. They have benefited from the enormous marketing arm of Disney which includes movies, TV, and theme parks; and they have been totally insulated from any missteps that may have occurred along the way. As it turns out, all of their movies have been enormously successful, but the odds of that happening are lower than can be adequately computed. The fact of the matter is, Pixar felt as though they needed a "safety net" when they signed that initial contract with Disney. And they have benefited enormously from that contract even though the "safety net" was ultimately not needed.

Finally, Disney and Pixar would probably have negotiated a new contract by now had it not been for the fact that Pixar is insisting that ownership of all original characters from the movies developed heretofore revert back to them. This is a totally unreasonable position from Disney's perspective and it's certainly understandable that Disney would rather not continue its relationship with Pixar than give up rights to characters they currently own. (I'm sure there's some compromise positions here that would allow Pixar ownership of future developed characters and a percentage of ownership of prior developments, but I have no idea how much of that has been pursued by the two companies. What I'm stating here is what's been reported by various media sources.)

So, you see: There's always two sides to every story.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,107
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
1
Top