Just keep swimming
April 4, 2013 11:54 AM   Subscribe

Ellen DeGeneres announces the making of a sequel to 2003's Finding Nemo. The movie, titled Finding Dory, is scheduled for release on Thanksgiving 2015.
posted by CrazyLemonade (137 comments total) 8 users marked this as a favorite
 
I think you mean the toys from this are scheduled to appear in a happy meal near you circa November 2015.
posted by 2bucksplus at 12:04 PM on April 4, 2013 [6 favorites]


NO, NO, NO, GODDAMNIT. This means that the sequel will show up before the original alphabetically and oh my god it's just going to ruin everything.
posted by phunniemee at 12:10 PM on April 4, 2013 [26 favorites]




She's crazy. She should at least ask Pixar to help her.

I hope this will be as good a sequel as the Toy Story sequels. I liked the original Finding Nemo; hopefully there's enough to say about fish to make a decent second one.
posted by bondcliff at 12:10 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


I think you mean the toys from this are scheduled to appear in a happy meal near you circa November 2015.

Pixar films haven't done McDonald's tie-ins for years.
posted by padraigin at 12:11 PM on April 4, 2013


Actually, I just re-watched Finding Nemo this past weekend because something (I don't even remember what) reminded me of it. It's cute. I hope the turtles make another appearance. I'm sure they will.
posted by phunniemee at 12:12 PM on April 4, 2013


Is Toy Story 2 well regarded? I'd count it as one of their weakest.
posted by Artw at 12:14 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


I am excited about this, but moreso for the Phineas and Ferb movie they mention on the same page.

I'm. Telling. Mom.
posted by BeeDo at 12:14 PM on April 4, 2013 [7 favorites]


Yay, 90 more minutes of Albert Brooks yelling!
posted by DU at 12:15 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Love Finding Nemo and all but one of all of other Pixar's movies (I didn't care for Cars 2, like most adults I'm led to believe). I am going to go with "excited and hopeful it will be as good as nearly every single other Pixar film."
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:15 PM on April 4, 2013


I first saw this announced on Monday - I honestly thought it was an April Fools' joke.
posted by LN at 12:15 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


I love Pixar. Love most of their movies. I understand the sequel thing---it's like ordering the same thing at your favorite restaurant. "Hey, old friend, I just can't get enough of you." Why order something new and lose your love for the restaurant? I know we all love to have something be completely new AND awesome, but I'd rather settle for the latter if I have to choose between the two. Not all Pixar originals have been awesome---sorry.
posted by resurrexit at 12:15 PM on April 4, 2013


I can hardly wait. I think it's a bold move having Ron Jeremy voice the gruff-but-lovable haddock private-investigator character, and the 9/11 Truther subplot should make things very interesting. The Charlie Tuna cameo seems forced though, and personally, I'm surprised to see that they are going for an R or NC-17 rating, based on the red-band nudity-and-violence-filled trailer (NSFW) that's already out.
posted by Cookiebastard at 12:16 PM on April 4, 2013 [9 favorites]


Why isn't it okay for Pixar to make sequels?

Pixar has (had) a reputation for doing original, unique work - not only in terms of the incredible animation, but also in terms of the stories they chose to tell. Doing sequels moves them away from that.

Not saying they shouldn't - hell, they might hit this out of the park, and I have nothing against a well-done sequel - but it feels like they aren't as interested in doing strong, new creative work anymore.
posted by never used baby shoes at 12:20 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


...but it feels like they aren't as interested in doing strong, new creative work anymore.

By they you mean Disney, not Pixar, right? The emergence of sequel-mania and the acquisition by the folks who brought you 'Cinderella II' are not by coincidence.
posted by leotrotsky at 12:23 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


Is Toy Story 2 well regarded? I'd count it as one of their weakest.


Wait... What??


Yeah, it's well regarded...

IMDB

Rotten Tomatoes
posted by stenseng at 12:27 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


The emergence of sequel-mania and the acquisition by the folks who brought you 'Cinderella II' are not by coincidence.

You know a lot of people like to bag on Aladdin 2: Return of Jafar but it's really something. I mean we get to see a villain like Iago redeem himself, he sacrifices himself so that others may live. If that's not a story wor.....

HAHAHHA, JUST KIDDING IT'S TERRIBLE AND I RECEIVED IT AS A GIFT WHEN I WAS YOUNGER. ITS ON VHS AND WE NEVER WATCHED AFTER THAT FIRST TIME.
posted by Fizz at 12:27 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


Is Toy Story 2 well regarded? I'd count it as one of their weakest.

Rotten Tomatoes: Top 100 movies of all time.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 12:30 PM on April 4, 2013


Why isn't it okay for Pixar to make sequels?

Because there's less risk-taking in sequels. Even though I'm not a huge fan of Pixar, it's still admirable of them to do something different that they're not sure if it will be well-received.
posted by FJT at 12:31 PM on April 4, 2013


Because there's less risk-taking in sequels. Even though I'm not a huge fan of Pixar, it's still admirable of them to do something different that they're not sure if it will be well-received.

Based on the tenor of this thread, I'd say the riskiest movie they ever made was Cars 2.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:32 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


You know a lot of people like to bag on Aladdin 2: Return of Jafar but it's really something. I mean we get to see a villain like Iago redeem himself, he sacrifices himself so that others may live. If that's not a story wor.....

Cinderella 3: A Twist In Time is actually kind of ...good. Well, least-awful.

don't ask how I know this
posted by The Whelk at 12:33 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


I really liked Dory in Finding Nemo. The whale scene had me in stitches. I'm fine with this sequel.
posted by Pendragon at 12:34 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


Aren't there sequels coming out now for most of the Pixar movies?
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:34 PM on April 4, 2013


Not for Up or Wall-E, which I'd argue don't lend themselves to sequels, and not for the Incrdibles which absolutely does.
posted by Artw at 12:37 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


PRODUCER #1: Gentlemen let me read you something. *rustles paper*" I really liked Dory in Finding Nemo. The whale scene had me in stitches. I'm fine with this sequel."
PRODUCER #2: "So that's our target market?"
PRODUCER #1: "Yeah, they'll watch pretty much anything related to something once good. Doesn't matter how water-down it is, we tap into their sensibilities and exploit them until they're dry."
PRODUCER #2: "I'm counting on it. Make it happen."
posted by Fizz at 12:38 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


If this is coming out Thanksgiving 2015, doesn't this mean the "real" Pixar movie of 2015 will come out that May? Isn't that when they typically release their main annual film?

I think it's fine they mix in some sequels/prequels with new original movies that are not likely to have sequels (Up 2: Even More Up). I didn't care for Cars 2, but I am hopeful about Monsters U. And it's hard to vote against Albert Brooks having another movie.
posted by mikepop at 12:38 PM on April 4, 2013


I thought an Incredibles sequel was in the works, but it looks like not officially yet. There's also not sequels for Brave, which is obviously pretty new, or Ratatouille.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:39 PM on April 4, 2013


Up 2: Now with more sad old men!
posted by The Whelk at 12:40 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


/diverts thread into Up 2 spec script session
posted by mikepop at 12:43 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


I'd put Brave in the "not really a good candidate for sequels" camp, myself. I'd also not that despite it not being a sequel people moaned like hell about it, which goes against the "people are turning on Pixar for doing sequels" line of argument a little.
posted by Artw at 12:44 PM on April 4, 2013


Aren't there sequels coming out now for most of the Pixar movies?

Although the upcoming Monsters, Inc. sequel looks "merely" entertaining, I have high hopes for their original in-the-works projects: The Good Dinosaur (May 30, 2014), directed by Bob Petersen (co-director of Up); Inside Out (June 19, 2015), a film about a little girl's mind from Pete Docter (director of Up); and another about Día de Muertos (2016), directed by Lee Unkrich (director of Toy Story 3).

As for Finding Dory, I'd pay to see 90 solid minutes Ellen Degeneres's hilarious whale imitation.
posted by Doktor Zed at 12:44 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Brave II: Brave Harder

I'd love to see (or rather hear) Alton Brown alongside Patton Oswalt in a Ratatouille sequel.
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:45 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


The obvious Up sequel would be "Down!". It would be about doggies.
posted by Artw at 12:45 PM on April 4, 2013 [19 favorites]


Up 2: The Undiscovered Country

or

Up 2: Four Badges and a Funeral
posted by He Is Only The Imposter at 12:46 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


ɹǝpu∩ uʍop d∩ :II d∩
posted by mikepop at 12:49 PM on April 4, 2013 [18 favorites]


Is Toy Story 2 well regarded? I'd count it as one of their weakest.

I loved Toy Story 2, and would say it was better than both Toy Story 3 and Toy Story. (Actually, I think Toy Story 3 is kind of over-rated, with both a looser plot & a bit more schmaltz than necessary. Heresy!) If I recall right, when TS2 came out critics went on a tear claiming that it was the rare sequel that surpassed the original, though Rotten Tomatoes doesn't make it easy to really distinguish any of them, and MetaCritic disagrees with me in terms of aggregate praise.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:52 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Really don't get the love there at all, sorry, I'd rate it down with A Bugs Life - which, being a Pixar is still pretty high, but still.
posted by Artw at 12:58 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Well, hey, I'll agree that A Bug's Life is definitely down at the bottom of the Pixar quality barrel. So, some kind of consensus.
posted by Going To Maine at 1:01 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


Is Toy Story 2 well regarded? I'd count it as one of their weakest.

Madness. Toy Story 2 is almost a perfect movie. It's Pixar's finest, with the possible exception of The Incredibles.
posted by straight at 1:03 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


"Yeah, they'll watch pretty much anything related to something once good. Doesn't matter how water-down it is, we tap into their sensibilities and exploit them until they're dry."

Ah. Well, did they bring back the turtles? It hasn't come out here yet, see.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 1:04 PM on April 4, 2013


Well, hey, I'll agree that A Bug's Life is definitely down at the bottom of the Pixar quality barrel. So, some kind of consensus.

I'd actually say the much beloathed cash cow Cars 2 is a better movie. Couldn't say that about Cars 2 though.

Everyone is agreed Planes doesn't count, right?
posted by Artw at 1:07 PM on April 4, 2013


The only thing worse than Cars (is this some sort of post-singularity Earth?) is Cars 2. I kept wishing for Mator to blow a gasket, but no luck.

Can you imagine Lightning McQueen and "Mustang" Sally (who is a Porsche!) having sex? How would she give birth?
posted by KokuRyu at 1:09 PM on April 4, 2013


This was much discussed on Twitter: basically the cars open to reveal the humans - vestigial creatures that survived the post-landing crash of civilization in Wall-E - the humans have sex and then a new car is manufactured around the babies.
posted by Artw at 1:11 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


The only thing worse than Cars (is this some sort of post-singularity Earth?) is Cars 2. I kept wishing for Mator to blow a gasket, but no luck.

Can you imagine Lightning McQueen and "Mustang" Sally (who is a Porsche!) having sex? How would she give birth?


yeah, and A Bug's Life was such bullshit too, um yes HELLO Pixar, here's a newsflash: bugs can't talk
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 1:12 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


Ratatouille 2: Revenge Of The Health Dept.
posted by The Whelk at 1:13 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


The "eyes" are the amniotic sacks the human-creatures live in.
posted by Artw at 1:14 PM on April 4, 2013


The only thing worse than Cars (is this some sort of post-singularity Earth?) is Cars 2. I kept wishing for Mator to blow a gasket, but no luck.

Ahem....Planes.
posted by Fizz at 1:15 PM on April 4, 2013


I have never seen Cars or its sequel because I don't want to ruin my general warm fuzzy feelings toward Pixar.
posted by Foosnark at 1:15 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


KokuRyu: " Can you imagine Lightning McQueen and "Mustang" Sally (who is a Porsche!) having sex? How would she give birth?"

WELL YOU SEE SON, WHEN A PORSCHE FACTORY AND THE CORVETTE ASSEMBLY PLANT LOVE EACH OTHER VERY MUCH....
posted by zarq at 1:16 PM on April 4, 2013 [10 favorites]


I can understand most of the reasons people dislike the Cars franchise, but I'm utterly baffled by people who seem genuinely turned-off by how the world of cars-with-no-people makes no sense. "If cars need gasoline, how did they eat before they started drilling oil wells? Why does Mater eat wasabi? Where are the cows to make pistachio ice cream and who milked them?" Really, peoples? THAT'S THE JOKE.
posted by straight at 1:17 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


um yes HELLO Pixar, here's a newsflash: bugs can't talk

What are you talking about? Bugs can talk.
posted by KokuRyu at 1:18 PM on April 4, 2013


The plant discovered by Eve is the origin of the biotech all Cars are derived from.
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Up and Ratatouille don't really lend themselves to the 90 minute toy commercial format like Cars, Monsters and now Nemo have become.

I'm sure Disney will eventually get around to monetizing all the Pixar properties, but they will likely go the Cars/Monsters/Nemo route for a while. It's making them ghastly amounts of money.

/damn you Disney, I love Ellen more than I hate you! I will probably see this movie, but I'm not buying a damn thing with awesome and adorable Dory on it. Not even a plushie! ... well maybe just one...
posted by Vysharra at 1:19 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


I'm sure Disney will eventually get around to monetizing all the Pixar properties, but they will likely go the Cars/Monsters/Nemo route for a while. It's making them ghastly amounts of money.

My impression was that Disney is already monetizing all of these properties. It's just that some of them have proven to be better at producing money than others. So go where the 3D modeling is going.


I should also mention here that Simon Rich (previously) is one of Pixar's writers, so he will presumably have his fingers in one or more of these upcoming films.
posted by Going To Maine at 1:25 PM on April 4, 2013


I'd put Brave in the "not really a good candidate for sequels" camp, myself.

Oh, I can think of a whole host of ways they could make a sequel, since making a great film doesn't seem to be important. I mean, at some point there's got to be a prince that can break her spirit, right? A re-working of Taming of the Shrew? Anything that leaves the door open to more adorable babies like the brother triplets would work.
posted by looli at 1:32 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


I have never seen Cars or its sequel because I don't want to ruin my general warm fuzzy feelings toward Pixar.

My experience has been that Cars gets a much worse rap than it deserves, mostly (but not entirely) from people who haven't seen it. I was never really interested in seeing it but then one day was home sick from work and it was on demand so I figured what the hell. At that point it was the only Pixar movie I hadn't seen yet. I expected something terrible.

It's decent. It's definitely my least favorite of all the Pixar movies I've seen, but it's decent. It's an obvious play for merchandising, but that's really just dressing on the core of the film, which is this pleasant little love letter to Route 66 and disappearing highway America. It has that same sense of thoughtful craft and love for the subject that characterizes Pixar movies for me. It also pulls off the unique trick of finding precisely the right role in which to put Larry the Cable Guy that plays to his few vestigial strengths as a performer. Making him tolerable is no small feat.

I guess what I'm saying is that seeing Cars will not diminish your warm fuzzies for Pixar. There are countless little touches that remind you you're watching a Pixar movie, and which allow you to consider how different this movie would have been if, say, Dreamworks had made it around the same time.

Cars 2, I can't say. I have no idea if it's good or bad, but I know that there is no part of me that is able to muster even a faint curiosity about it.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 1:33 PM on April 4, 2013 [6 favorites]


Yes fine fine WHERE IS THE INCREDIBLES SEQUEL?! Come to think of it, given the episodic nature of superhero comics, the Incredibles would make for a great weekly TV series.
posted by Scoo at 1:35 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


And since I'm making wishes, I'd like a Cars commentary track by James Kunstler.
posted by Scoo at 1:36 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


I was not raised in a household where adults watched 'children's movies' so I missed a good chunk of the early Pixar years. When I was in college, my father received Finding Nemo as an um, bribe for test driving a car and we watched it together. Now that was a revelation.

I fucking love that movie. I can even quote whole chunks of it and generally I can't remember movie quotes to save my life. Ever since, I've gone out of my way to see the Pixar movies (even the detestable Cars--skipped Cars 2 though).

So when I heard the news that a sequel was coming out *but* that it would focus on Dory, I was torn between horrified (sequels are so rarely good and Nemo didn't need one) and delighted (more Dory! Her character is so much fun and Ellen is awesome!). I have hopes, not high hopes but rather hopes, for this one.
posted by librarylis at 1:59 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


When I first heard about this I thought it was an April Fool's joke too.

*tries really hard to be hopeful*
posted by flyingsquirrel at 2:12 PM on April 4, 2013


Pixar is over. Well, just about over. As a creative force i mean. They peaked with WALL-E, which almost certainly would have been canceled had the Disney buy-out been earlier. The number of sequels penciled in and recently released are a clear sign that it is all down hill from here.

Oh "Toy Story 3" i hear you cry. Well here's the thing - it takes a *huge* swing at Disney. I've not seen this interpretation elsewhere so i'll cross post my theory from another forum, where i ranted about this not long after seeing the film:

1) The 6min short had more Pixar invention in it than any part of the 103min main feature.
2) The film had a "don't fuck with us" feel to it in the sense that the main characters were under continual threat of destruction.
3) Not to mention the fact that the most memorable part involving Buzz is when Tim Allen gets replaced as the voice actor - he was the one actor who said he would return even if the film wasn't made by Pixar. So this is the writers effectively saying "you don't need us? well we don't need you either buddy."
4) The main plot of the film involves the original characters being imprisoned by another character (this other character is angry after being replaced many years ago) and being forced to entertain against their will at a level much below their ability. The only way they can escape is by crawling through detritus. A clear metaphor for the Disney/Pixar deal.


The question is, which animation studio is going to now take the crown? Ghibli had it through the 80's and early 90's. Pixar had it for a good 15 years after that. Who next?
posted by lawrencium at 2:18 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yes fine fine WHERE IS THE INCREDIBLES SEQUEL?! Come to think of it, given the episodic nature of superhero comics, the Incredibles would make for a great weekly TV series.

There was a monthly comic for a while, written by Mark Friggin' Waid of all people, and it was great until it stopped suddenly because we're not allowed to have nice things.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:18 PM on April 4, 2013


The Incredibles is a sequel-within-a-film. A sequel would kind of wreck what the original film stood for.
posted by KokuRyu at 2:23 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


Did they sign the seagulls again? Those guys are key.
posted by Kabanos at 2:24 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


Ghibli had it through the 80's and early 90's.

I am going to beef with this. All of the major Disney musical animated films came out in the 80s and 90s, and those are a major part of the brand - they were both quality animation and immense popular successes. I love Ghibli and find the films gorgeous, but I don't really think they have the same level of pop culture resonance.
posted by Going To Maine at 2:38 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


3) Not to mention the fact that the most memorable part involving Buzz is when Tim Allen gets replaced as the voice actor - he was the one actor who said he would return even if the film wasn't made by Pixar. So this is the writers effectively saying "you don't need us? well we don't need you either buddy."

Cite, please. Oh nevermind, I think I realize what you meant. But he was still in Toy Story 3, and has been the voice of Buzz in all the shorts.
posted by 41swans at 2:38 PM on April 4, 2013


Pixar is over. Well, just about over. As a creative force i mean. They peaked with WALL-E

My eyes are rolling so hard right now. Was Up not made by Disney-Pixar?

I am not reflexively anti-sequel, and I don't understand the urge to be so. Should Lucas have stopped at Star Trek: A New Hope? Should Zemeckis have stopped at Back to the Future I?

Bad sequels are bad movies. That does not mean all sequels are bad movies. Pixar did a great job with Toy Story II and III. I think they can do a great job with Finding Dory. If they don't, then I won't watch it, and my enjoyment of Finding Nemo is not in any way diminished.
posted by muddgirl at 2:44 PM on April 4, 2013 [7 favorites]


What the hell is Star Trek: A New Hope?
posted by George Lucas at 2:46 PM on April 4, 2013 [22 favorites]


You people who think Cars was forgettable are WRONG. Your opinions are bad and you are bad people.

I was pretty meh about it when I first saw it too actually. But then one day I found myself with two sons and suddenly I remembered what was so cool about race cars when I was 5 years old. It's got all of the classic elements of a great Pixar film. Strong positive message -- believe in yourself, you need true friends, and some things are much more important than winning. Strong, likable characters, including an independant, self sufficient leading lady who's more than a love interest. Subtle humor to keep adults engaged. Several smart celebrity cameos. A big climax and a satisfying, unexpected resolution. And it's the only Pixar movie I can think of that doesn't have anything frightening whatsoever for Very Small Kids. I think it was a brilliant, very well thought out film for the under five age group.

Cars II was execrable. I downloaded it for the kids to keep them engaged on a trans-Pacific flight and while they were asleep (thank you Benedryl!) I previewed it and then deleted it about half way through. God, what a low brow stinker. Seriously, you take a wholesome franchise of kids' characters and give them guns to shoot each other with? And a car-torture scene?

So the Pixar sequel history is extremely mixed. I have an open mind about this. Pixar does still develop new charcters and stories. Dory was a great character but it will take a lot of clever writing to make her more than a tired 90 minute single joke bore.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 2:48 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


Up after the first five minutes was kind of mediocre.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:48 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Star Trek: A New Hope

The little-known first chapter of George Lucas's crossover Luke/Wesley fanfiction?
posted by muddgirl at 2:52 PM on April 4, 2013


Up after the first five minutes was kind of mediocre.

Many say the same about WALL-E, which puts Pixar's quality peak somewhere around Luxo Jr.
posted by muddgirl at 2:56 PM on April 4, 2013


Or the fifth minute of Up.

(It was a really good five minutes)
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:58 PM on April 4, 2013


Metafilter: Your favorite movie sucks.
posted by DigDoug at 2:59 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Ghibli had it through the 80's and early 90's. Pixar had it for a good 15 years after that. Who next?

Video Brinquedo
posted by griphus at 3:03 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Up after the first five minutes was kind of mediocre.

See, I consider Up to simply be delightfully insane. Like, the first five minutes was great, then it sort of drifted downhill, but the kind of downhill where jokes-are-kind-of-for-kids-but-an-old-man-is-hauling-a house on his back-so-let's-keep-watching and then it's all oh-of-course-he-has-to-find-that-she-was-happy-with-him-but-it-feels-good-anyway acceptable (with a dash of I-hid-under-your-porch-because-I-love-you humor) and suddenly it gets what-the-hell-is-happening-you've-got-dogs-in-fighter-planes-sweet-jebus! mad. It reminded me of Daniel Pinkwater in a good way.
posted by Going To Maine at 3:12 PM on April 4, 2013


leotrotsky: "...but it feels like they aren't as interested in doing strong, new creative work anymore.

By they you mean Disney, not Pixar, right? The emergence of sequel-mania and the acquisition by the folks who brought you 'Cinderella II' are not by coincidence.
"

You realize that John Lasseter of Pixar is in charge of the production slates for both Pixar and Walt Disney Animation, right? When he took charge, he killed off a number of sequels he didn't want made, including a version of Toy Story 3 where there's a toy recall and they have to go to Japan to rescue Buzz. An animated movie doesn't get made there without his say so.
posted by bluecore at 3:28 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


phunniemee: "NO, NO, NO, GODDAMNIT. This means that the sequel will show up before the original alphabetically and oh my god it's just going to ruin everything."

Hey there Mr. Grumpy Gills...
posted by IndigoRain at 3:30 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


The Incredibles is a sequel-within-a-film. A sequel would kind of wreck what the original film stood for.

That's what they said about Watchmen!
posted by Artw at 3:33 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hey, Watchmen Babies was art.

No pun intended.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 3:37 PM on April 4, 2013


. . . Can you imagine Lightning McQueen and "Mustang" Sally (who is a Porsche!) having sex?

I am certain that the internet that can provide detailed assistance with your inquiry.

Hell, I'll watch Finding Dory. But then, I'm going to watch the Wreck-It Ralph sequel too.

(Says the person who refuses to go see The Croods because it does not even attempt to depict what is known of the life of Paleolithic anatomically modern humans.)
posted by Countess Elena at 3:44 PM on April 4, 2013


(It was a really good five minutes)

I still can't even think about the part where the old guy puts his hand over the paint handprint on the letterbox without wanting to immediately find my wife and hug her, hard, so - yes.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 3:44 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm excited. I don't really get the furor at all. Cars 2 sucked, yes. It is know. It was also a cash-in sequel to Pixar's other weakest movie. Finding Nemo on the other hand, is arguably their best. (I personally would go for The Incredibles but arguments can be made.) Dory is a great character Ellen Degeneres is outstandingly funny and charming. Cars 2 had Larry the Fucking Cable Guy. There is really almost no point of comparison between these things.

Come on, people. It's more Dory. Let's get behind this.
posted by Navelgazer at 4:00 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


You want a good cartoon? Watch Spongebob. None of that smarmy, earnest, and totally uncomedic "you need to believe in yourself and have friends" junk. That's what makes Cars the worst kind of treacle, plus the hellish vision of a planet dominated by internal combustion machines.
posted by KokuRyu at 4:03 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


Pixar is over. Well, just about over. As a creative force i mean. They peaked with WALL-E

Bull puckey. After WALL-E was Up
and Toy Story 3 -- two of their best films. Yes, Cars 2 was "a failure," by critical standards, but then we get Brave, 78% on rotten tomatoes.

And you know. I think the side-quel that is Planes has a ton of potential, the idea of Monsters University is *almost* as brilliant as the ads, and I love the ideas they have queued.

As to the Disney buyout? Well, since then they've released Cars, Ratatouille, WALL-E, and Up.

You know, I think Disney has done a horrible thing to Pixar. They might have made them better.

Well, other than Cars 2. That sucked because unlike TS2 and TS3, they didn't have a new story to tell.

Note that. So far, Disney - and these were all Disney - is 2 out of 3 on Pixar Sequels. And MU looks awesome, and Planes even looks intriguing.

So, yeah, I have no problems here. Disney distributed every movie Pixar made, and has directly had control for three of their best.
posted by eriko at 4:03 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Finding Nemo was spoiled for me by the gratuitous death of Nemo's mother at the start of the film. I mean, why? What is it with Hollywood and its casual treatment of parental death? I expect the sequel has Nemo's dad caught, fileted, and fried in tempura batter while his lifeless eyes stare up at us from a plate in the background, and an an echoing voice rumbles "DEAD. DEAD. YOUR FATHER IS DEAD AND WE'RE GOING TO EAT HIM."

Happy meal!
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:15 PM on April 4, 2013


Pixar was over when How to Train Your Dragon came out... The Oscar for Brave was a pity vote.
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 4:17 PM on April 4, 2013


Finding Nemo was spoiled for me by the gratuitous death of Nemo's mother at the start of the film. I mean, why?

Even back then they were positioning themselves for a Disney takeover.
posted by KokuRyu at 4:21 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


Nemo's mother's death (and the death of all of Nemo's brothers and sisters, as eggs) sets up why Nemo's father is so desperate to find Nemo.

Just as Ellie Frederikson's inability to conceive a child, and then later her death, sets up why Carl Frederikson was so determined to move himself, and his house, to Paradise Falls in Up.
posted by eriko at 4:21 PM on April 4, 2013


Look guys I know that Eeyore 3: The Ulcer Of Anticipation has been stuck in pre-production hell for the last seven years and we're all pretty bummed about that but that's no reason to take it out on Pixar, ok?
posted by furiousthought at 4:23 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


I just wanted to suggest that anyone who likes Shawn Wallace should watch Partysaurus Rex, which is on the new Monsters, Inc. Bluray. It is delightfully bizarre, and it has John Ratzenberger in it, as required by law. (That is a terrible YouTube copy, but it was the best I could find.)
posted by Elementary Penguin at 4:32 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


1) The 6min short had more Pixar invention in it than any part of the 103min main feature.

Surely you can't be referring to "Day and Night"? I'd be hard-pressed to find a single 5-minute sequence in Toy Story 3 that wasn't better than that.
posted by straight at 4:43 PM on April 4, 2013


Nemo's mother's death (and the death of all of Nemo's brothers and sisters, as eggs) sets up why Nemo's father is so desperate to find Nemo.

Just as Ellie Frederikson's inability to conceive a child, and then later her death, sets up why Carl Frederikson was so determined to move himself, and his house, to Paradise Falls in Up.


Exactly.

Something I just realized though, for why I think Nemo just works better as a whole than Up does (and I love Up, but I also love Brave and anyway, moving on...)

In Finding Nemo, Marlin is terrified of anything happening to Nemo, not only his only child, and a crippled child at that, but the last remaining part of his wife, in many ways. The premise of Marlin having to search the whole ocean for his son - who got captured because he was trying to live any way other than overprotected for a damn minute - works so well because we know that Marlin has to keep searching until he finds him - he literally has nothing else in his life that he cares about, but also because the major theme of the movie is that a life lived to safely is not lived at all. All of these elements inform each other and work beautifully in a coherent whole.

In Up, however, the astounding first five minutes inform the premise, to be sure - this is why Carl takes his home with him instead of letting it be demolished - but the theme of the climax is more of a don't-meet-your-idols type of thing that makes much more sense in another story and doesn't seem very much at place in this one.

Just my thoughts as of right now.
posted by Navelgazer at 4:49 PM on April 4, 2013 [7 favorites]


You want a good cartoon? Watch Spongebob. None of that smarmy, earnest, and totally uncomedic "you need to believe in yourself and have friends" junk. That's what makes Cars the worst kind of treacle, plus the hellish vision of a planet dominated by internal combustion machines.

Hey, I believe the world is a dishonest cruel place where the only reason for humor is to soothe the cynical despair and mock the absurdity of our existence the same as you. I just don't want my kids to have that realization while they live under *my* roof. I can't get them to pick up their toys as it is. Pixar exists so that parents aren't bored to tears while the kids learn they can behave and succeed and cause fewer problems for their parents before they leave home and my wife and I can move on and pretend we never made the mistake of breeding.

*Father-of-the-Year pours another manhattan while the kids argue over whether it's Cars or A Bug's Life tonight.* "Stop hitting your brother! We have two iPads, go watch the movie in your room!"
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 4:59 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


the astounding first five minutes inform the premise, to be sure - this is why Carl takes his home with him instead of letting it be demolished - but the theme of the climax is more of a don't-meet-your-idols type of thing that makes much more sense in another story and doesn't seem very much at place in this one.

Interesting. I've always viewed the emotional climax of Up as the moment when Carl, after getting rid of the kid and the dog and the bird so that he can sit in his relocated house in peace (and let's be honest here, get on with dying), discovers that his wife wanted his adventure to continue. Since her death, Carl's been nursing that pain and loss, but can finally let go. The bad guy, on the other hand, has been nursing the pain and loss of his humilation his whole life and can't let go - which is why a reinvigorated Carl can defeat him.

The moment when he realizes that there is still life for him, and that he should engage with it rather than hide, is the true culmination of the story Up began in those first five minutes.

At least, that's my impression of the film.
posted by never used baby shoes at 5:28 PM on April 4, 2013 [21 favorites]


Not to overstate the obvious, but the house in Up was a perfect plot device, and of course represented his attachment to his past life, and the need to give it up in order to keep living.

I didn't like the concept of the villain in the story (although there are so many brilliant little details throughout the story that, like Chekhov's gun, got used by the end of the movie), and my chief complaint with many of the Pixar movies is that there has to be a villain, and it's very black and white about who the villain is (unlike most of Miyazaki's stuff, which is very ambiguous).

Wall-E, of course, is a Christian fable... Good for children, right?
posted by KokuRyu at 5:36 PM on April 4, 2013


Okay, now I want to just keep analyzing Pixar movies thematically.

Brave has some of the same issues that Up does, specifically in that the opening (which shares a lot of the same tension as Nemo's opening) sets up the climax, to be sure. Much as Carl and Ellie's childhood adoration for Muntz is set up early and pays off in the final act, King Fergus losing his leg to the demon bear sets up the climax of Brave. But in neither movie is that what the emotional hook is about (and thinking it over more - I've only seen Up once so I might have just forgotten if this was played more clearly - Muntz's crazy scheme to take out the bird could be seen as a twisted mirror image of Carl's scheme to get to Paradise Falls, both in order to finally set right an old wrong, or something, but I never felt that way when watching it.) Up is about Carl trying to live the adventure he and Ellie never had and understanding that the adventure they did have was the important thing - that Ellie was an infinitely more important part of that than Paradise Falls could ever be. And that works, but Muntz is kind of a distraction from it. (on preview, never used baby shoes nailed this idea.)

Meanwhile, in Brave, the story is about an antagonistic relationship between a daughter and mother with divergent views on the daughter's role, and them coming to a close understanding of one another and that the mother has wisdom, while the daughter still needs to make her own decisions. This is an important story and one the movie tells pretty well, and I like that the climax involves Merida standing up to her beloved father in defense of her mother, not because Fergus is being evil or anything, but because good god dad you need to trust me on this. And the opening scene sets that up, but doesn't serve as an emotional hook into the story, because the story isn't about that until the end.

Now, for two Pixar films that don't have the devastation cold-open, Ratatouille and Wall-E both still manage their themes very well without it. Ratatouille is of course the story of what it takes to be an artist, and is lighter fare (heh) than most Pixar movies, but still manages the Nemo trick of making the odds about as impossible for the hero as can be imagined. Remy has at the start a supporter, of sorts, in Gustav, with his idealistically egalitarian approach to cooking. "Anyone can Cook," he says, which gives this rat his culinary dreams. Much has been made of Brad Bird's seemingly Randian libertarianism as displayed here and in The Incredibles but I personally love the counterpart to Gustav that we find in Anton Ego's final monologue. The two views disagree, still, but they are both still important. A young artist needs to feel like his or her craft is not so mystical, and that the fundamentals of it are something anyone can accomplish. In the big leagues, no, not everyone can hack it, but there's no place for prejudice in determining who can. The movie also keeps hammering these themes in supporting characters. Linguini can't cook for shit - but he's an awesome waiter and it's okay that he has this talent instead of another. Collette also has to work her ass off to prove herself in a kitchen that doesn't give opportunities to her because she's a woman, Gustav making the point that every person in the kitchen is important, etc. Just tons of themes and viewpoints about art and collaboration, all tied up brilliantly when Ego takes his bite of the titular dish - true art is transformative. Open yourself to it and appreciate it.

Wall-E is, of course, fascinating because of its structure if nothing else, spending almost half of it's runtime in a dialogue-free post-apocalyptic earth in a style evocative of the French and (especially) Italian New Wave. But that time is spent gorgeously setting up a lot of themes we'll understand as it progresses into its (weaker but still great) second movement. Wall-E has to spend eternity cleaning up the aftermath of humanity's excess, but he's optimistic about it, because it means he can seep through all of the garbage to find treasures of humanity's greatness and innovation and art. He is lonely, and so is happy to deal with any amount of frustration in order to have some kind of connection (to EVE, to a cockroach, whatever.) Aboard the Nostromo, the amazing space-dance between Wall-E and Eve allows for the pandered-to John and Mary to find a real connection, and spreads to the Captain to learn about Earth's wonders and to fight off OTTO, programmed to see no course but an inevitable and constant continuance of the current one, and find hope for humanity's future in conscious self-direction.

It's a beautiful film, largely because it all ties together so well thematically. Wall-E is the optimist in the wasteland, carrying with him the evidence of hope and doing everything to keep it alive. He is the spark, itself a brilliant motif tied visually to optimism and free-will in the film.

Sorry this was so long. I'm just obsessed with thinking over these things now.
posted by Navelgazer at 6:00 PM on April 4, 2013 [5 favorites]


Much has been made of Brad Bird's seemingly Randian libertarianism as displayed here and in The Incredibles

I don't think it's directed by Brad Bird, but I seem to remember that Toy Story III struck me as having a touch of red scare to it.
posted by tychotesla at 6:38 PM on April 4, 2013


I don't know anything about Brad Bird's beliefs, but The Incredibles repudiates Randian Libertarianism at pretty much every turn.
posted by straight at 6:49 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Up 2: The Undiscovered Country

or

Up 2: Four Badges and a Funeral


Do I have to do everything for you people? Ahem:

Up 2: No Good
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:56 PM on April 4, 2013 [10 favorites]


Now, as to sequels...

Monsters, Inc. is thematically about cooperation as opposed to competition. Randall represents competition, to be sure, but mostly you get the idea that this economy lives on the screams of the feared human children, but we learn that laughter is far more efficient. Sully and Mike have to overcome the innate fear of children and the power-structures built up around the current system in order to change it. Now, Monsters University appears to be about... Mike and Sully competing when they first meet in college. We know that they later go on to be best friends, so it appears that Pixar has understood their themes and are keeping to them.

With Dory, well... as opposed to Marlin, who keeps those close to him so protected that he can't live life, Dory is pretty fearless about adventure, but friendless. Her arc, such as it is, is one of understanding that she needs friends to care about and be cared-for by. She also has, sadly, much less of an inner struggle. So I don't know how the sequal will play those things. But I'm wiling to trust them for now.
posted by Navelgazer at 6:57 PM on April 4, 2013


Cinderella 3: A Twist In Time is actually kind of ...good. Well, least-awful.
don't ask how I know this


Nostalgia Chick?


I, for one, would be interested to find out how the hell Dory ended up with Ten Second Tom amnesia in a sequel. And how she deals with having a family of her own under those circumstances.

I'm not normally super into Ellen's sense of humor, but darned if she didn't rock Nemo. I am in favor of this.
posted by jenfullmoon at 7:30 PM on April 4, 2013


It'll be interesting to see how Pixar is going to turn Dory from a foil to a protagonist. Pixar is great with characters with clearly defined goals that make sense emotionally. (See Navelgazer's in depth analysis above.) Dory's defining characteristic is her short-term memory loss -- so that drive that Marlin has in Finding Nemo (or any Pixar character has) won't be easily replicated.

But I love Dory and I'm excited to see a children's movie with a female protagonist that isn't a princess. Even if it is a sequel.
posted by JustKeepSwimming at 7:40 PM on April 4, 2013 [2 favorites]


You know a lot of people like to bag on Aladdin 2: Return of Jafar

I remember the show being not one of the worst things Disney made for TV actually, even without Robin Williams.

and another about Día de Muertos

You know, Disney owns this now.
posted by JHarris at 7:43 PM on April 4, 2013


Up is about Carl trying to live the adventure he and Ellie never had and understanding that the adventure they did have was the important thing - that Ellie was an infinitely more important part of that than Paradise Falls could ever be.

And the payoff is when Carl finally actually read the book that he and Ellie wrote and realizes that he and Ellie *actually had that joyous adventure together.*

The five minute scene at the start will bring a tear to your eye, but if you've ever truly loved and lost someone, that moment when he reads "Thank you for the adventure. Now go make your own" will leave you crying. Crying for sadness, and for joy, but it will leave you sobbing. The whole movie, between that first five minutes, and that moment, is Carl bearing the sin of not bringing Ellie to Paradise Falls, and that moment is when he is allowed to forgive himself, and absolve himself, and to be Carl again, not the Widower Frederikson, is when he realized that this wasn't what Ellie really wanted. What Ellie really wanted was to be with Carl, and what she got was to be with Carl for her entire life. And this? This was good.

That's when he throws the chairs out the door. That's when he lets Dug into his life. That's when he stops being the widower, and starts being himself -- the man that Ellie fell in love with, the man who could love, and be loved. That's when he becomes Russell's grandfather and Kevin's rescuer -- all in that one moment. That's when he live again, when *he* stops condemning himself for the "sin" of not going to Paradise Falls with Ellie.

That was the payoff for Carl. Not Paradise Falls. Not Muntz falling from the skies. When he realized that he didn't need absolution from anybody but himself, when he realized just how much wonder and joy Ellie had brought -- and had been given -- from him, that's when he could forgive himself for the sin of living longer than her.

The whole movie is about self forgiveness. Russell blames himself for having absent father. Dug blames himself for not being a good dog. Carl blames himself for living longer than Ellie -- indeed, for hurting her trying to give her what he thought she really wanted, Paradise Falls.

It wasn't Russell who was a bad son, it was Russell's father being a bad father. Dug wasn't a bad dog, Muntz was a bad master. And Carl? Carl wasn't a bad husband.

Carl was a brillant husband. It just took him a long time to realize that.

And I really hope Carl is still sitting on that curb trying to convince Russell that the fire hydrant is a red car.

Someday, I need to watch that movie again. But it'll be a while. There's a lot that hit home in that movie for me.

But brilliance? There's a reason that Up had such amazing reviews, and made so much money, and why people talk about it so fondly.

Because, well, all of us have real problems forgiving ourselves.
posted by eriko at 7:44 PM on April 4, 2013 [31 favorites]


eriko - I agree completely. Everything you just said is why I love Up. (and said beautifully.) I just thought that Muntz didn't fit in thematically as well as elements in other Pixar movies have.
posted by Navelgazer at 7:48 PM on April 4, 2013



Sorry this was so long. I'm just obsessed with thinking over these things now.


Don't apologize. I love this shit and that was great.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 7:49 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Thanks, though I screwed up calling the chef "Gustav" instead of "Gusteau."
posted by Navelgazer at 7:55 PM on April 4, 2013


I shall call him Squishy and he shall be mine and he shall be my Squishy. Come on, Squishy Come on, little Squishy.
posted by zarq at 8:01 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yeah, the opening scene of Up is really a special moment.

I think it's because, as the movie starts, you're subconsciously settled in the mindset that you're just watching a cartoon, you're indulging yourself in a "kids movie," leaving you completely unprepared for the heartrending segment that lays bare your own mortality and that of the people you love.
posted by cacofonie at 8:03 PM on April 4, 2013


It'll be interesting to see how Pixar is going to turn Dory from a foil to a protagonist.

A protagonist needs something to strive for.

What does Dory want?

Memory.

There is a *ton* of potential here. I can see how they could fuck this up, but the fact that they made Monsters University, rather than trying to tell a story after a story ended, shows how Pixar *gets* stories.
posted by eriko at 8:07 PM on April 4, 2013 [4 favorites]


I can totally see them ripping off Memento.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:15 PM on April 4, 2013


I will add that after all of the guff Pixar (rightfully) got for not having a female protagonist before Brave, elevating Dory is a nice step.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:17 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


Andrew Stanton is back in the chair for Dory, so I'm taking that as a good sign. For as much as Disney bought up Pixar completely, the heart of what made Pixar is still in there, even if now beating for two bodies (Disney Animation, in addition). I think the biggest surprise with Dory is the lead time of only 2 1/2 years. It's not unusual for Pixar films to take longer to produce. I think Brave, for example, took approximately 4 years to go from just a title, The Bear and the Bow (which I still like better).

I'll definitely give it a chance.
posted by Atreides at 8:20 PM on April 4, 2013


Oh I'm sure there's been a load of pre-production before they were ready for Ellen to announce it as happening.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:23 PM on April 4, 2013


Disney Animation doesn't do bad work - the Tinkerbell stuff was far better than it had a right to be and Tangled was pretty great. I hear good things about Wreck It Ralph.
posted by Artw at 8:26 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


I can totally see them ripping off Memento.

Or Eternal Sunshine.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:28 PM on April 4, 2013


Honestly, I have complete faith in Pixar and its sequels. They put a lot of hard work into making these sequels and most of them are easily better than original animated feature films that other major studios put out. And remember, John Lasseter is head of Disney Animation and put a stop to all of those crappy direct-to-dvd sequels that Disney was churning out.

Of course Disney is Lasseter's boss and Cars made them a boatload of money, so of course they wanted a sequel. So yes, Cars 2 seemed like it was made purely to make more money from merchandise and not so much Pixar saying "hey we really want to tell this story with these established characters". But I guess it's a good thing if some of that money is used so Pixar could make other, less marketable films. Also, Cars doesn't seem to resonate with adults (it's on the bottom of my Pixar list), but holy crap, kids LOVE Cars! It's loud and flashy and has FAST CARS that TALK. Kids go nuts over that stuff. I consider Cars "My First Pixar Movie" - to be watched before kids are old enough to enjoy the slower, more subtle Pixar films.

So I am excited for Finding Dory. She is a great character and I think they will treat her story well. Remember Marlin found her randomly swimming around (well, rather, they literally bumped into each other)? Maybe she was on the way home and Dory's family is looking for her? I dunno, I can see a bunch of story opportunities due to her lack of memory.
posted by littlesq at 8:38 PM on April 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


WHY do kids like Cars so much?
posted by The Whelk at 8:54 PM on April 4, 2013


I hear good things about Wreck It Ralph.

And rightfully so -- it's a brilliant movie.
posted by eriko at 9:03 PM on April 4, 2013


WHY do kids like Cars so much?

I guess it's the same reason that kids like Hot Wheels, except these cars talk and have adventures! AND GO REALLY FAST. Also, most of the other Pixar films aren't as...loud? or as fast-paced and I guess it seems to grab their attention more.
posted by littlesq at 10:00 PM on April 4, 2013 [1 favorite]


I never liked Hot Wheels so maybe this is me, I just find it totally mystifying but then I have an actual phobia about cars and lanes more than two cars wide so, YMMV.
posted by The Whelk at 10:10 PM on April 4, 2013


"Sea monkey has my money" is the funniest line in any movie ever.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 12:10 AM on April 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


@muddgirl - I'm not anti-sequel. My problem is that Pixar are moving towards an inward looking, short-term, quick turn around, lets recycle our ideas and characters model. Pixar, are, at their creative best when they allow their ideas to ferment for years and when they are allowed to be influenced by outside sources.

This is probably just a short phase, part of a Disney 10 year plan no doubt, and normality will be resumed. Maybe. What happens in 5 years time when someone demands a Toy Story 4?

As for Back To The Future and its sequels, well yes it's brilliant. It's the exact same idea replayed 3 times, even down to individual set pieces.
posted by lawrencium at 12:48 AM on April 5, 2013


eriko: "The five minute scene at the start will bring a tear to your eye, but if you've ever truly loved and lost someone, that moment when he reads "Thank you for the adventure. Now go make your own" will leave you crying. Crying for sadness, and for joy, but it will leave you sobbing."

This is one of those things I kinda wish I'd known before watching Up for the first time, given that I was in the middle of a packed cabin of people on a long-haul flight and I'd maybe had a little too much to drink in order to calm my nerves.

Tell you what, folks don't have a clue how to handle bearded dudes crying in public.
posted by barnacles at 12:53 AM on April 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


A comedian did a show based around watching Disney DVD-only sequels. From this, I learned there is such a thing as a 'midquel'. It was broadcast on Radio 4Extra, but annoyingly doesn't seem to be anywhere online.
posted by mippy at 1:41 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


"Yes, I'm a natural Blue."
posted by zarq at 3:15 AM on April 5, 2013


I'm not anti-sequel. My problem is that Pixar are moving towards an inward looking, short-term, quick turn around, lets recycle our ideas and characters model.

Finding Nemo came out in summer 2003. I wouldn't call over twelve years a quick turn around (unlike Cars 2).

Plus, answering my own question way upthread, Finding Dory is an extra release coming out at Thanksgiving. The "regular" Pixar movie for that year will come out in summer and is an original story:
Pixar takes audiences on incredible journeys into extraordinary worlds: from the darkest depths of the ocean to the top of the tepui mountains in South America; from the fictional metropolis of Monstropolis to a futuristic fantasy of outer space. From director Pete Docter (Up, Monsters, Inc.) and producer Jonas Rivera (Up), the inventive new film will take you to a place that everyone knows, but no one has ever seen: the world inside the human mind.
Again, this is unlike Cars 2 which was that year's Pixar summer release.

So whereas under a true Disney regime Finding Nemo 2, 3 and probably 4 would have already been released straight-to-DVD with inferior animation and replacement voice actors, we have a Pixar-controlled Disney revisiting the characters with the original actors a dozen years later. I'm going to assume they've taken some time to come up with a good story.

Don't forget that Pixar basically reverse-acquired the animation (and theme park!) divisions of Disney for negative 7.4 billion dollars. That is Disney said to Pixar "Here is 7.4 billion dollars, please take our money and put all your people in charge and keep doing what you're doing." The Disney "acquisition" of Pixar was not a more traditional acquisition where the buying company comes in and takes over management and tries to gut out the good parts.
posted by mikepop at 5:16 AM on April 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yes, there would have been a Toy Story 3/4/5 regardless. Pixar didn't want their baby destroying so they took over the controls, taking a swipe at Disney in the process. Disney might have said "keep doing what you're doing" but they've also said "we want those cash-cows, and if you don't make them we will".
posted by lawrencium at 6:59 AM on April 5, 2013


The new movie will indeed focus on Dory dealing with her memory loss, with the help of a new fish from Deep River, Ontario. The film will be called 42 Mulholland Drive, Sydney, and David Lynch will direct.
posted by Kabanos at 7:11 AM on April 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Also, Cars doesn't seem to resonate with adults (it's on the bottom of my Pixar list), but holy crap, kids LOVE Cars! It's loud and flashy and has FAST CARS that TALK.

Depends on the adult. It resonates with my wife because she's from a small town that has seen better days. I like it because I love automobiles (seemingly not a common opinion on Metafilter) and the movie is jam-packed with automotive references from the mountains shaped like Cadillac Ranch, to the order that the lights blink on Flo's V-8 Cafe. Nearly every car in the movie is based on and styled exactly like a real-world car.

And of course, the obvious love letter to Route 66.
posted by Fleebnork at 12:16 PM on April 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


A small anecdata moment: I had a coworker with a wife & three or four stepdaughters. Apparently, none of the girls really liked Up. Similarly, I have a coworker now with two sons. Cars seems to have been popular, but Up and WALL-E weren't. There's an odd zone of "entertainment that looks like it's for kids but is mostly for adults", and I think that critics can be bad at picking that out.
posted by Going To Maine at 1:07 PM on April 5, 2013


In probably the best example of the Disney/Pixar merging, the new movie, "Planes." It literally says in the trailer, something along the lines of, "From the world of Cars ...." and then has a Disney logo slapped on it.

It was kind of unsettling.
posted by Atreides at 1:29 PM on April 5, 2013


I'm doubtful that John Lasseter, writer of Toy Story 3, was secretly sticking it to John Lasseter, head of animation at Disney.
posted by Artw at 1:46 PM on April 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


(aside)

A comedian did a show based around watching Disney DVD-only sequels. From this, I learned there is such a thing as a 'midquel'. It was broadcast on Radio 4Extra, but annoyingly doesn't seem to be anywhere online.

It was on the BBC "Comedy of the Week" podcast sometime last year; it was very funny and actually somewhat of a love letter to Disney's churn-ware. Not much use now though as they only keep the mp3s up for 7 days.

A google search for "Thom Tuck Goes Straight To DVD download" does turn up one dodgy download site.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 3:22 PM on April 5, 2013




Mark Andrews, one of the directors, is a complete Scottish fanatic. If anyone gave him the opportunity to direct another Pixar film set in Scotland, he'd be all over it like plaid on kilt.

I don't think Merida needs another adventure, personally.
posted by Atreides at 11:40 AM on April 10, 2013


« Older Sympathy for the Cabbie   |   Seriously, KRS-ONE and Rockapella in the same... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments