Pixar: Are the glory days over?

[Drtooth]

I can see why would see some sort of vague resemblance, but the only things between HTTYD and Braver that share a common theme is a couple characters in HTTYD with Scottish accents (because Scandinavians) and Craig Fergeson. The films are completely different otherwise.

 

[Pig'sSaysAdios]

Ugh,I was so excited for Pixar's new movies after IO and TGD but almost all the movies for the next four years (besides Coco) are completely unnecessary sequels,that is with the exception of Incredibles 2 which I think is very necessary. Seriously,why Cars 3 ??? No one even liked the first two Cars movies beside little kids and engineers. Although maybe they'll use this as a chance to do something original with those and redeem the franchise's name.
As for Finding Dory,I really liked the idea of each Pixar film sort of being in it's own self contained universe and all of them being standalone adventures. You end one story you go on to the next. Okay so the whole sequel thing worked out well with Toy Story but that's because there were still stories to tell with those characters,but movies like Finding Nemo really didn't need a sequel. The story was Marlon was too protective over Nemo,they both go through heck to find each other. Marlon overcomes his fear of the ocean and can finally let go a bit and be a better father for Nemo and can finally make friends like Dory. There you go story resolved,they all live happily ever after. Same with Brave,A Bug's Life,WALL-E,Ratatoullie, all were only meant to be one story each, and they are better movies because of that. Watching these movies you don't think about that terrible sequel that was unnecessary and ruined the franchise.
I just really hope they don't make sequels to any more of the currently existing films,like Up or something.

 

[Drtooth]

I've never thought their sequels were that intrusive on their quality. Like I said, MU just had the pleasure of being the public's hate bone for not being an original film, even though when they had that original film in between Cars 2 and MU, they hated that one for other reasons.

As I've always said (and I'll put this in bold to get attention) the sequels Pixar released after Cars were ones Disney was threatening to make with Circle 7. Only theirs would have been far worse. TS3 was about Buzz being recalled, MI2 was a predictably reversal of the first movie (monsters in human world), and I dunno what Cars 2 would have been about, but I get the feeling it was a mission pack sequel. Meanwhile you look at other CGI kid's film animation studios and they're all about sequels. We have 5 Ice Ages. Shrek was supposed to have 7 movies until they wisely cut it to 4 after the 3rd's not that great-ness. And that's counting the spinoff Puss in Boots as its own separate thing.

Now, I do think that TS4 is kinda unnecessary, and they can easily do the whole plot about finding Bo Peep as a TV special. And these things aren't throwaways, either. The first special was a great character piece for Jesse, while Trixie the Dinosaur got a great day in the spotlight in the second. I'd love to see more Pixar films get a TV special treatment to expand their universe. Cars 3 was going to happen. I at least allow them their one movie franchise for the younger kids, it's clearly to sell merchandise. And at least it's not Planes. Kids genuinely like the Cars franchise.

Meanwhile, you look at Dreamworks, the strong second in the CGI kid's movie world and they're not doing so hot either. Some of their last films failed to get an audience do to the strange subject matter. Bad^^^ Santa? Fast snails? An update of a cartoon series from the 60's? Home managed to do decently in the US, but meh overseas. The sad thing is, the Penguins of Madagascar movie flopped in the US due to bad timing. They pretty much punted off a couple finished movies far down the line as a result and fired a crapload of people, only relying on cheaper overseas studios. Even HTTYD2 managed to not get the huge pot they were expecting due to being released opposite a strong comedy sequel. Same thing happened with KFP, which is why it's getting a strange January release.

 

[D'Snowth]

You have to remind yourself of something we've been discussing in the sequelitis thread, and that's just it: sequelitis. That's what's become of sequels anymore: they've gone from being something you genuinely looked forward to because they were opportunities to continue the story into new and exciting directions, and perhaps invoke some further character development . . . now, they've become nothing more than glorified money-makers designed to milk franchises for more than they're worth. That, in and of itself, has become a problem too: this is why Hollywood is franchising movies now, because franchises make money, stand-alone features don't. I'll agree that THE INCREDIBLES did need a sequel (Conan actually had the woman who did Violet's voice on his show the other night), but at the same time, as I've said before, Pixar really needed another Brad Bird flick - he's got this almost Don Bluth-esque style of storytelling that make his movies particularly enjoyable, because they're slightly darker and a little more mature than other Pixar movies, yet they're still kid-friendly enough. FINDING DORY, I'm a little concerned about myself: FINDING NEMO was one of Pixar's greatest of their earlier movies, and Dory, admittedly, stole the show . . . but can she carry a whole movie herself? CARS 3 and TS4? Agreed: completely unnecessary; as we've said before regarding TS, they should really just stick to TV specials and such, because they wrapped up the whole arc beautifully in TS3, there's no reason to continue on beyond that.

 

[Drtooth]

I think what we all need to appreciate here is Disney under Eisner was bound on making cheap DTV sequels to all their movies, even going so far as crushing a bunch of episodes of an unsold show together to make a "movie" out of them. Toy Story 2 was exactly that case, but Pixar wanted to do something bigger and bolder and it actually gave them a theatrical release. It was their third movie, in fact. It was made out of pressure by Disney, but they managed to make it into something more.

Side note about the Disney cheapquels, the one that would have actually been great, a Hercules sequel based on one of the original treatments, was never made.

As for franchise films, it isn't just so much about how they make more money than stand alones so much as they're planned incredibly in advance. Everyone's trying to start something similar to the MCU, but without the varied concepts and genres that make them actually good. As for Pixar, while I'm sure there's pressure internally to make follow up films for franchise and merchandising sake, I can't help get the feeling they've gotten burned on some of their stand-a-lone concepts lately.

Remember Newt? They had this great concept about two newts having to develop a relationship they didn't want to get into, and then the overrated Rio and the completely unnecessary Alpha and Omega were fast tracked and they had to abandon the film completely. Then after announcing a Dia de los Muertos film, Book of Life came out. Though, to be fair, Book of Life was a film the creator was trying to get made for years, probably even before Pixar announced it. Not to mention Brave and Good Dinosaur hit multiple stumbling blocks in production (in the case of TGD, it actually bettered the movie). Plus, other than Toy Story and Cars, the sequels to Pixar films aren't exactly released a couple years later. Dory is 13 years after the first one? Incredibles 2 as well. A far cry from TS1 being followed by TS2 in a matter of 4 years. I mean, I can't blame them for going with established characters, but it seems these aren't exactly as quick and thrown together as most. Incredibles 2 was a possibility for years, but that was up to Brad Bird finding a strong enough concept.

 

[mr3urious]

Plus, other than Toy Story and Cars, the sequels to Pixar films aren't exactly released a couple years later. Dory is 13 years after the first one? Incredibles 2 as well. A far cry from TS1 being followed by TS2 in a matter of 4 years.

And aside from TS2, Pixar itself is the studio that calls the shots on sequels, rather than Disney forcing it upon them. I can at least respect that more.

 

[Drtooth]

I'm very happy Pixar stopped Disney from the DTV sequels as well. Not to say that there weren't some actually fun and enjoyable ones. Some of them were essentially pilots for TV shows, anyway. Return of Jafar was one for Aladdin the series.

It's one of those perspective/comparative things with Pixar. They sure sound like they have a lot of sequels, but compared to other studios, they have a much smaller ratio of sequels to originals. Dreamworks is all about sequels and TV and Netflix spinoff shows. Illumitoon has 4 Despicable Me (one upcoming) movies and two that aren't. Including DTV cheapquals, Sony has like one standalone that hasn't been given a sequel yet, the Surfing Penguins thing (they announced Hotel Transylvania 3 the second it opened to a successful September slot). Two if you count the in production Popeye. The only Blue Sky movies I can think of that don't have sequels are Horton Hears a Who, Robots (and I swear it's more deserving of one than Ice Age was), and Epic. Then again, they have so many Ice Ages and a sequel to the overrated Rio. Heck, that awful "Happily Ne'er After" had a follow up for some reason, and I'm not going to bother discussing Alpha and Omega's annual crappy DTV sequel. And frankly, their track record of sequels has been mostly good. Cars 2 is a straggler, but frankly better than some of the competition. Of course, the released number of sequels Pixar has is 5. 2 Toy Story sequels, Cars 2, and MU (technically a prequel, but...) There are 4 upcoming, TS4, Finding Dory, Cars 3 (again, all about toy sales and keeping the littlest kids happy) and Incredibles 2. Other than Cars 2 and Toy Story 2, these sequels came out years after, even decades after the original film.

So the total is about 8 sequels (including soon to be made) to 13 original films.

 

[D'Snowth]

Regarding TS3, I've notice there's a serious divide regarding Lotso: some feel that he should have redeemed himself in the end, while others actually like that he didn't, with very little middle ground. Personally, I really don't mind so much that he doesn't redeem himself, if only because the ensuing scene in the incinerator was really powerful and something that you don't see a lot of in animated movies these days.

One thing I've also noticed is that a lot of people (including HOW IT SHOULD HAVE ENDED) feel that Lotso is in the wrong for feeling hurt that he got replaced because replacing him meant that Daisy loved him so much. I suppose I can see it from that perspective, but doesn't it actually make sense that from Lotso's perspective, being replaced meant just that: he was replaced?

 

[Drtooth]

Regarding TS3, I've notice there's a serious divide regarding Lotso: some feel that he should have redeemed himself in the end, while others actually like that he didn't, with very little middle ground. Personally, I really don't mind so much that he doesn't redeem himself, if only because the ensuing scene in the incinerator was really powerful and something that you don't see a lot of in animated movies these days.

I find the fact he didn't redeem himself refreshing. The film wouldn't have been as powerful if it ended on a happy, sunny ending on his part. It's a pretty well worn cliche (one that does make you feel good, but still), and it gives that extra emotional push of hopelessness and anger that makes the rescue by the LGM's all that more satisfying. Not to mention Lotso's fate. Sure it kinda parallels TS2's ending with the Prospector being the property of a little girl who draws all over, yet loves her toys. But with the added punch of the garbage worker saying how much he loved his own Lotso, and strapping him to the truck.

Once saw a Fire truck with a Stimpy doll tied to it.

If it was a happy ending where Lotso saw the light and reran the daycare, well... sure, it would be heart warming, but let us not forget he was essentially a white slaver and the toy equivalent of a human trafficker. One of the darkest villains in Pixar's history, right there with Syndrome, who killed super heroes so he could be one.

 

[D'Snowth]

I find the fact he didn't redeem himself refreshing. The film wouldn't have been as powerful if it ended on a happy, sunny ending on his part. It's a pretty well worn cliche (one that does make you feel good, but still), and it gives that extra emotional push of hopelessness and anger that makes the rescue by the LGM's all that more satisfying.

Exactly my point. The filmmakers admitted on the DVD commentary that the LGM's rescue was also something of a cliche with the claw being a Deus Ex Machina; but as you say, which would be more satisfying? The moment of hopelessness and anger leading up to the rescue that we got, or Lotso seeing the light and the error of his ways and pushing that button to save them from plummeting into the incinerator?

Not to mention Lotso's fate. Sure it kinda parallels TS2's ending with the Prospector being the property of a little girl who draws all over, yet loves her toys.

That's another complaint I've see too, is that TS3 was a rehash of TS2, but with Lotso instead of Stinky Pete, and a daycare setup like a prison instead of Al's apartment being the departure place for a Japanese museum.

Once saw a Fire truck with a Stimpy doll tied to it.

All I ever see on trucks are those fake ballsacks that hang from the back bumper.