Fuck Disney. Toy Story 3 - 2008 - NO PIXAR

Wshakspear

Wshakspear

CAGiversary!
From ICv2.com (a comic/specialty shop buisness website)

Disney Preps Unit For Pixar Sequels
'Toy Story 3' in 2008
February 03, 2005

The Walt Disney Co. has announced the creation of a new computer animation unit, which will be based in Glendale California and will produce feature film sequels to the Pixar movies Disney has distributed, a highly successful group of films that includes Toy Story movies, Monsters Inc., Finding Nemo and The Incredibles. Disney's distribution deal with Pixar gives the mouse house the right to make sequels with or without Pixar's cooperation. The announcement of the new Disney unit dedicated to making sequels to the Pixar pics would appear to indicate that Disney has given up all hope of re-negotiating its distribution agreement with Pixar, which expires with the distribution of Cars, now slated for the summer of 2006.



Disney announced that the first project for its new animation unit will be Toy Story 3, which, unlike many of the direct-to-video sequels the studio makes for its own films such as the Lion King, will be theatrically released in 2008.


..........

.........

God that pisses me off. I'll form words later about how im really thinking...
 
When Toy Story came out, the number one thing that impressed me about it, far more so than the amazing graphics, was the fact that they bothered to write an actual story for it. The vast majority of filmmakers would have simply been content to show off their fancy new technology and not bothered to take the time and effort to have an interesting story with likable characters.

Disney ranks at the top of the list for studios who churn out shit sequels for the money. Expect Toy Story 3 to be a shallow, unimaginitive forefest designed squarely for kids 3-9, but will bore even most of THAT audience.
 
And thats why im worried. If its bad, it will tarnish Pixar's image while everyone ignores that "Disney" title. I have more respect for Pixar as a company more than any other, and its sad seeing crap like this happen. It's unfortunate that the Incredibles falls under this agreement, becuase it will hurt seeing some other company f'ing around with those characters.
 
Pixar rules! They will be laughing at Disney's feeble attempts to make Toy Story 3.

I smell another bomb
 
Disney's decision not to renew a deal with Pixar has been well known in the film biz for about a week now and it was rumored for months. Lots of analysts say Disney did the right thing because Pixar was gonna want a lot to stay with them. Personally I also think it's because Disney didn't want to ever have pixar overpower them at least not from within. Anyways, you shouldn't fault Disney it was just a business decision. They keep the rights because they helped create (yes Pixar did most of the work but not everything), market, and distribute those characters and films.
 
Why is Eisner running Disney into the ground? Stick with the good stuff! No more sequels. I mean who wants to see Mulan II???????????? Straight to video movies are soo crap. They should have killed Eisner when they had the chance.
 
The stories, characters and concepts were Pixar's. All of it. The marketing and distrobution of the films were Disney.

And no, its not a good buisness move...why drop a company that will STILL make you a ton of money, just because you cant have as much as you've had before? it just all bugs me.
 
[quote name='sying']Why is Eisner running Disney into the ground? Stick with the good stuff! No more sequels. I mean who wants to see Mulan II???????????? Straight to video movies are soo crap. They should have killed Eisner when they had the chance.[/quote]

The stockholders voted him out. He's still there. go figure.

SaveDisney.com is a good website to see just how f'd up they are at the moment.
 
I doubt this will sully Pixar's image (if it's bad). Anyone savvy enough to know Pixar is the house behind the original, will also be savvy enough to know this latest one was not done by them. People who just think of all of these movies as 'Disney' will just think, 'Man Disney sure screwed up this series!' Just my 2 cents. Not to mention the fact that all of the reviewers will certainly point out this fact when lambasting the film (if it's bad).

Heck maybe this new animation studio will be the next Pixar, eventually create their own original movies, get out of their Disney contract, and we'll all be bitching that Disney is going to destroy this unit's image ;)

BTW, I thought Pixar splitting from Disney was a done deal a long time ago. Was it really only finalized this week? (Disney deciding to make theatrical release sequels to Pixar movies is new to me, though.)
 
[quote name='Wshakspear']The stories, characters and concepts were Pixar's. All of it. The marketing and distrobution of the films were Disney.

And no, its not a good buisness move...why drop a company that will STILL make you a ton of money, just because you cant have as much as you've had before? it just all bugs me.[/quote]

On pure concept and creation perhaps, but is Woody still Woody without Tom Hanks in the voice cast? Is Tom Hanks there with Disney money and influence? Probably not...Even if you don't agree with that, there's no doubt they helped to shape the images the characters and films put forth, if only by marketing. Plus without distributing rights, having those characters and being able to make another Toy Story film would be pretty fruitless. Also, you can balme Pixar for selling their ideas to Disney in the first place, that's what happens when you work under a label that isn't always your own.

And the reason they didn't have to keep Pixar with them is simple, their target box office doesn't even know what Pixar is. Pixar served their purpose for Disney in giving them new animated films kids will go see, but the kids don't care if Pixar is making Toy Story 3, they'll see it regardless and it'll gross $300 mil or so. Even though you or even i don't really like it, the point is they can still pull in tons of money without the Pixar name and without giving Pixar much of anything. At least until people wise up the fact that the films aren't as good. But that's a tleast 3 sequels away probably...
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And the reason they didn't have to keep Pixar with them is simple, their target box office doesn't even know what Pixar is. Pixar served their purpose for Disney in giving them new animated films kids will go see, but the kids don't care if Pixar is making Toy Story 3, they'll see it regardless and it'll gross $300 mil or so. Even though you or even i don't really like it, the point is they can still pull in tons of money without the Pixar name and without giving Pixar much of anything. At least until people wise up the fact that the films aren't as good. But that's a tleast 3 sequels away probably...[/quote]

Kids know what Pixar is...and that bouncing lamp. By association they have put that lamp and that name with those good movies. Mind you, the target audience for the first Toy Story is now 10 years older, and seem to still see Pixar movies. I know that they can throw the movies out without the Pixar label and still make the cash, but saying the kids dont realize this is just wrong.
 
Pixar kicks major ass. I really hope Disney doesn't fuck up Toy Story 3, as this will hurt Pixar's name, even though they will have nothing to do with it. Disney's more recent movies have sucked ass. Pixar was the only thing keeping Disney from becoming pure shit...
 
Okay so an 8 year old knows what it is (I still say some of them dont, just because they see a lamp for a logo doesn't mean they know it's a fully creative computer animation film studio, but I agree there's some association going on there), but I doubt he/she cares so much so that they won't see Disney's next CG animated movie.

Listen, I don't like this whole thing that much either, I enjoyed all of Pixar's films. but I don't think Disney was totally stupid for doing it as they had their reasons and I do think it was a good business move at least for next 5-8 years. So, I'm willing to give them a little bit of credit for doing what they thought they had to do in a business world that is harsh.
 
[quote name='sying']Why is Eisner running Disney into the ground? Stick with the good stuff! No more sequels. I mean who wants to see Mulan II???????????? Straight to video movies are soo crap. They should have killed Eisner when they had the chance.[/quote]

Actually, Toy Story 2, a very successful sequel, started as a direct to video project. It was fairly late in production that they decided it had the strength to carry a theatrical release.

Those direct to video sequels have made a ton of money. That is all the justification they need.
 
Even if most people don't know 'Pixar' the company, its still going to hurt Pixar because its going to be more difficult for them to advertise their new films because movie companies (pretty much all of them) use their old movies to 'introduce' their new ones in ads.

"From the makers of Toy Sto - wait, never mind that one. From the makers of Monster's In - wait, Disney ruined that one too with the shitty TV show. Um, just see our new movie. We promise its good. Really, not like that crapfest that Disney made out of our old movies."

Pixar will survive, but their brand recognition is going to be hurt a bit by this, which is probably Disney's plan anyway: Come back to us, or we're going to smear your old movies with crap.
 
The driect to DVD/Video stuff makes more money than you'd think. Once again it's slapping a name on something to sell it, something Disney can do like almost nobody else. Hell I was going on about box office sales when that's only where they make a portion of their profits. All the big money is in the merchandising and marketing of their products.
 
[quote name='epobirs'][quote name='sying']Why is Eisner running Disney into the ground? Stick with the good stuff! No more sequels. I mean who wants to see Mulan II???????????? Straight to video movies are soo crap. They should have killed Eisner when they had the chance.[/quote]

Actually, Toy Story 2, a very successful sequel, started as a direct to video project. It was fairly late in production that they decided it had the strength to carry a theatrical release.

Those direct to video sequels have made a ton of money. That is all the justification they need.[/quote]

The fact remains, though, that Toy Story 2 was a direct to video sequel made by Pixar. Disney's only involvement, again, was the marketing and distribution.

What really scares me is that, in the past, Tim Allen and Tom Hanks have both said they wouldn't do Toy Story 3 if Pixar wasn't involved. If the sequel is without the creative team AND the main voice actors from the first two movies, I don't think that we can have any hope at all that it's going to be a good movie...
 
[quote name='Xevious']Pixar rules! They will be laughing at Disney's feeble attempts to make Toy Story 3.

I smell another bomb[/quote]

Agreed, Im offended that they would even attempt to make a sequal w/o pixar, I say we gather up the cags by some shotguns and raid disneys fortress.
 
It's a shame the partnership had to end... but Pixar is growing, and I think they can hold their own.

Toy Story 3 might not be so bad, this whole split thing has been in the works for a very long time. I thought it started over a year ago.
 
[quote name='cheapass Gundam']RIP Jim Varney. There will never be a true Toy Story 3 without the real voice of Slinky Dog.[/quote]

Oddly enough, that's the first thing I thought of, too.
 
I also read a news story a few days ago that every animation director Disney had offered Toy Story 3 to direct has turned it down because no one wants to cross Pixar as right now it is still the biggest CG animation studio around (though Dreamworks animation is gearing up).
 
Did Dreamworks ever work with Disney?

I am just curious as I remember reading about a year ago the falling out Disney had with Pixar or Dreamworks.. and if the Pixar thing is just happening now that would leave Dreamworks..

Anyway.
 
No, dreamworks is not a part of this. The fallout was with Pixar and Disney.

It came time for Pixar to renew thier contract, and Disney would not give ANY leeway in the situation, thus Pixar would be making a lot less than they should. Technically this isnt officially over until Cars, Pixars next film, is out in theaters. These stories about TS3 give a good picture of whats going on behind the scenes, because Pixar would be doing TS3 IF they were going to stay with Diseny.
 
[quote name='Snake2715']Did Dreamworks ever work with Disney?

I am just curious as I remember reading about a year ago the falling out Disney had with Pixar or Dreamworks.. and if the Pixar thing is just happening now that would leave Dreamworks..

Anyway.[/quote]
It was Pixar, they've been working on hammering out a new contract for months, it's pretty much finished now. Pixar wanted the rights for all its movies back (Disney holds the rights to all of them, including the yet to be released one with Cars if I'm not mistaken) and that is the main thing they wanted in renewing the contract with Disney.

#1000 baby, LET THE CELEBRATION BEGIN...
*faint sounds of two hands clapping together, whooping and hollering, and then a single gunshot followed by a thud*
 
This is very bad news. I thought the first two were good for kids and adults alike. I might not even bother watching this crap.
 
eisner3rm.jpg


YOU TALKIN' TO ME?!? :twoguns:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top