posted
The year before that is released, Disney will open their new Toy Story-themed ride at the Disney/MGM Studios:Toy Story ManiaPosts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I loved the Toy Story films, but Sophie absolutely refuses to watch them. Something about them appears to creep her out. It's not the CGI, because she likes both Monsters, Inc. and Cars.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting...but there is something distinctly...eerie about the toys. They look human, but slightly off. At least, Buzz and Woody. Maybe there's something scary to her about the idea of toys coming to life? Is she old enough now for that sort of linear thinking?
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Leonide: The year before that is released, Disney will open their new Toy Story-themed ride at the Disney/MGM Studios:Toy Story Mania
posted
You know, the thing about CGI movies that bugged me after a couple years was how different they all WEREN'T.
Putting up with variations on a theme is one thing.
Putting up with them milking every successful idea they have until the end of days is too much. If Toy Story and Shrek turn into The Land Before Time ( !!! ), I swear I'm just going to stop watching CGI movies entirely.
(I should add this rant is mostly in response to the article I think I read on Hatrack the other day about plans to make five Shreks, multiple Madagascars, more penguin movies, a Shrek tv show...etc etc. I'm just sick of it, come up with something new, or leave us alone!)
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's been 8 years since the last Toy Story film...and 2 -was- a very different film from the original.
I wouldn't mind if Pixar turned The Incredibles into a franchise. (They -aren't- a Fantastic Four rip-off, no matter what people fixated on the power similarities say.)
posted
I would love The Incredibles to be turned into a franchise. And they're not a ripoff, even though the powers were very probably inspired by the FF.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there is huge franchise potential with The Incredibles. If any other movies are as good as the first, I would definitely watch them.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Incredibles was probably the best cgi movie I've ever seen. As far as Toy Story goes, why make another? Really. Yet ANOTHER repeat kid's story about inanimate objects, or animals, coming to life and talking. Oooh, how original.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
*shrug* The first film didn't have much in common with the second film, stihl1. By the standard you're using, a film about romance or films about the same war shouldn't be made because they're not 'original'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm all for anything Pixar. I have loved all of their works (except Bugs Life, I just like like it).
As a father of four, I struggle with what I let my children watch. I hate it when movies put in humor that is geared too much toward adults or "sneak in" profanity so they don't have a G rating (Donkey=Ass in Shrek, Bitchin in How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Dirty Ho in Cat in the Hat, etc.).
The closest Pixar came to an eye roll from me was in Cars when the twins come up to McQueen after his race and flash their headlighs at him and when Mater says "He did what in his cup" after McQueen mentioned Doc having won three Piston Cups.
Why do childrens movies (especially animated movies) have to push so hard on decency. Is a G rating really that bad?
This has affected me so much that I will not take my children to Universal Studios when we travel to Orlando this summer. Not that Disney is perfect, and I watch adult themed movies often. I like the gross humor and blatant disregard for anything reverent in my films, but I am an adult. I know the score going into a film. It is harder to know these days if a childs film meets the standards I have set for my children. Unless, I am walking into a Pixar movie.
Sorry for the rant. But I guess that what these forums are for.
Posts: 1766 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: *shrug* The first film didn't have much in common with the second film, stihl1. By the standard you're using, a film about romance or films about the same war shouldn't be made because they're not 'original'.
So?
I'd like to see animation applied to something a bit more adult, to dive into originality and push the boundaries. Making the same stupid Disney movie over and over again is far from original. Frankly I'm tired of it.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by stihl1: I'd like to see animation applied to something a bit more adult, to dive into originality and push the boundaries. Making the same stupid Disney movie over and over again is far from original. Frankly I'm tired of it.
Considering absolutely zero details have been released about TS3 (other than its probably year of release), you're assuming a lot.
Does getting the writer of Little Miss Sunshine for the script really sound like they're aiming for just a repeat of the previous films?
Since I don't equate "edginess" with originality, I'm quite happy the Pixar aims for wholesome, family films. I see nothing "stupid" about being clean and fun for everyone.
posted
We don't agree that they've been making "the same stupid Disney movie over and over again" in the first place. Frankly, you don't really have anything substantial to back that claim up, certainly not in regards to the Toy Story films.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have to back it up, it's my opinion. If you like seeing 'clean and wholesome' films then it will probably be right up your ally. Along with every other repetitive, unoriginal animated movie this year.
I do not like to see the same 'clean and wholesome' animated film rehashed time after time after time. I won't watch them anymore, no matter how well done the animation is. Give me something cutting edge, adult, and original. Not some rehash of animals talking, or cute objects coming to life, etc. I want real stories, and plots, not the same old same old. It can be done, it has been done to some extent in the past, and apparently isn't being planned on in the future. Instead we get yet another rehash of the same cutesy kid's stories.
And while both TS were good films, I cannot remember the last time I thought "Gosh, I wish we had another one of those movies coming out again" in the past 5 years. Sometimes less is more.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course you don't have to back it up. But there are opinions that have reasons, and opinions founded in, "I don't like it and that's my opinion." I was interested in seeing which yours was.
quote:I want real stories, and plots, not the same old same old. It can be done, it has been done to some extent in the past, and apparently isn't being planned on in the future. Instead we get yet another rehash of the same cutesy kid's stories.
Your opinion seems to be founded solely in 'presence of talking toys equals boring and repetitive'. You apparently don't want to listen or consider that just because a movie has things that talk in it, doesn't make it the same story. Toy Story 1&2 were about as different in plot as a sequel movie can be.
Yes, you're entitled to your opinion. No one is saying you're not. But I'm equally entitled to my opinion that yours is based on a gut reaction without considering or listening to contrary points of view, and in fact ignoring substantial evidence that contradicts your statements.
Oh, and if you want something 'cutting edge, adult, and original'...well, what exactly do you mean by 'cutting edge' and 'adult' and 'original'? I've pointed out that the second TS film was as original as a sequel can be (you offered no reasons why it wasn't, other than "it's another talking toy movie"). So what's 'cutting edge' and 'adult' mean?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As an adult, I've enjoyed many of Pixar's films. I've found them to be thoughtful and original. Toy Story 2, in particular, was meant to appeal to an adult audience (I expect many of the sci-fi references would go over a child's head).
Just because kids also like a story doesn't mean it can't be "adult." Harry Potter, anyone?
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Toy Story 2 was about a man learning to deal with the reality that he's going to die someday soon.
You can hardly find a more adult, edgy topic for a cartoon, stihl1.
If you reject it just because it had fantasy elements and could be enjoyed by a broad audience....then I don't "originality" is what you're really looking for.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Give me something cutting edge, adult, and original.
Coming from Pixar in 2010: Topper, the heartwarming saga of a jailed neo-nazi who learns to love, and the gang of quirky convicts -- one from every major ethnic group -- who help him on his journey down Death Row.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
For some reason I think that Topper should also include the return of musical numbers to animated films. hmm...
I don't know how I feel about a Toy Story 3. I really did love the first one, even more than the second one which as a kid I remembered being alittle too mature. My own insecurities projected too much on Woody's story and I was horrified by some the choices he made in response. That and the fact that Sid was creepy!
But I loved the second one and would be thrilled if I knew for sure that they turn out another original movie in the franchise. The human experience is complex enough that I hope they could find another important life lesson to slap toy characters over.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: Toy Story 2 was about a man learning to deal with the reality that he's going to die someday soon.
You can hardly find a more adult, edgy topic for a cartoon, stihl1.
If you reject it just because it had fantasy elements and could be enjoyed by a broad audience....then I don't "originality" is what you're really looking for.
I never said I "rejected" Toy Story 2. In fact I said "both Toy Story movies were good". I enjoyed both of those movies. But I don't need to see another one. And I really don't need to see another talking animal, or car, or toy, or whatever animated film. Why not make a regular film with animated characters? Why does it always have to be kid oriented?
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Of course you don't have to back it up. But there are opinions that have reasons, and opinions founded in, "I don't like it and that's my opinion." I was interested in seeing which yours was.
Your opinion seems to be founded solely in 'presence of talking toys equals boring and repetitive'. You apparently don't want to listen or consider that just because a movie has things that talk in it, doesn't make it the same story. Toy Story 1&2 were about as different in plot as a sequel movie can be.
The problem here is, as I just pointed out, I never said they weren't. YOU said I said that. I said I wasn't interested in more of the same rehashed Disney crap.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Yes, you're entitled to your opinion. No one is saying you're not. But I'm equally entitled to my opinion that yours is based on a gut reaction without considering or listening to contrary points of view, and in fact ignoring substantial evidence that contradicts your statements.
What's wrong with a gut reaction? And can't an opinion just be based on personal feelings? Personally, I feel that these rehashed crap movies with talking animals and cute objects are boring, hardly original, and overdone. I don't want to see that. Why can't I call for better subject matter in an animated movie?
I've got no problem with someone liking those kinds of movies and wanting to see family oriented movies. Traditionally in America that's what animation has been done for. But elsewhere around the world, animation is not limited to that genre. With the advances in animation today, what's wrong with someone asking for animation to do more sci fi, or drama, or westerns, comedies, etc?
Case in point. Paramount is considering doing another animated Star Trek series for their next series. That would be great. I always hear about how hard it is to make good sci fi on tv because of special effects budgets, etc. Animation could cut that in half. You could open that franchise up and really take things in a new direction. That's new and original, cutting edge. No talking animals or cutesy objects there.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it more cutting edge and original to have a post-apocalyptic science fiction animated series?
Look at the various cartoons fitting that description Japan has made for decades, and from the 90s onward began to pop up in the states. It's been done. Repeatedly.
You still haven't given a reason for why you claim TS3 will be "stupid and childish" beyond "It'll be about toys and aimed at families, so it just will be."
What makes fantasy elements and a family audience innately boring? I just don't accept that nothing exciting can be done with such elements, or that they are limiting. They create different types of films...but not bad differences.
Good grief, The Incredibles (which you also say you liked) had as much fatal violence as any big budget action flick...and included a sub-plots about dealing a mid-life crisis and suspected adultery. And it starred nothing but humans...Pixar's already made the sort of film...so what's wrong with them -also- doing the other type? Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: You still haven't given a reason for why you claim TS3 will be "stupid and childish" beyond "It'll be about toys and aimed at families, so it just will be."
Once again, I didn't say that. What I said was I was tired of the same Disney movie over and over, and that I didn't want to see another Toy Story movie. I usually don't want to see multiple sequals to any movie. I hate to see repeat movies beat to death.
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: What makes fantasy elements and a family audience innately boring? I just don't accept that nothing exciting can be done with such elements, or that they are limiting. They create different types of films...but not bad differences.
They are boring to me. Am I not entitled to have that opinion? I've said repeatedly that if you like that stuff fine. I don't. I've seen enough animated kid's movies to last a lifetime.
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: Good grief, The Incredibles (which you also say you liked) had as much fatal violence as any big budget action flick...and included a sub-plots about dealing a mid-life crisis and suspected adultery. And it starred nothing but humans...Pixar's already made the sort of film...so what's wrong with them -also- doing the other type?
Pixar has already made 2 Toy Story films. What's wrong with them doing more of the Incredibles types of movies?
It's my opinion. I don't want to see the kid's type animation movies, I'm calling for something different. Why do you have such a problem with that?
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You were linking the Toy Story films in a post detailing complaints about "tired old Disney crap"...it's not really very surprising that people would come to the conclusion they've reached, is it?
This is a discussion board, stihl1. We discuss opinions and events, and argue sometimes about them. If all you wanted to do was criticize-without any sound reasons beyond, "It's my opinion," btw-the TS films without and contrary comment, you should have simply said so and saved yourself and us the trouble.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've done a little research into this supposed sequel, asking around to different cast members, and apparently this is a very old, very un-true rumor. They all say there isn't going to be a Toy Story 3, ever.
edit: and, obviously, i don't have links or anything to substantiate that, just the word of a few disney employees and animators
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: You were linking the Toy Story films in a post detailing complaints about "tired old Disney crap"...it's not really very surprising that people would come to the conclusion they've reached, is it?
This is a discussion board, stihl1. We discuss opinions and events, and argue sometimes about them. If all you wanted to do was criticize-without any sound reasons beyond, "It's my opinion," btw-the TS films without and contrary comment, you should have simply said so and saved yourself and us the trouble.
No, what you're doing is criticizing my opinion. I've given reasons why I want to see something new and different done with animation. I've given reasons why I'm tired of the same old Disney movies. The problem is, YOU don't think they're valid.
And as far as TS3 goes, people keep quoting me saying things I didn't say about it. That IS a problem, and it's very tiresome to see certain individuals putting words into my mouth. I never said it would be "childish" or "stupid". I said it would be rehashed Disney about the same talking animals or cutesy objects. Here, I'll even quote myself:
quote:Originally posted by stihl1: The Incredibles was probably the best cgi movie I've ever seen. As far as Toy Story goes, why make another? Really. Yet ANOTHER repeat kid's story about inanimate objects, or animals, coming to life and talking. Oooh, how original.
I REALLY, REALLY hate it when people make assumptions or put words into my mouth I never said. And I never said those types of movies were invalid or people were wrong for liking them. In fact, I did say:
quote:Originally posted by stihl1:
I've got no problem with someone liking those kinds of movies and wanting to see family oriented movies.
Again, I'll ask, what's wrong with asking for something new in the genre? I've noticed neither you or Corn Puffs has bothered to answer that. What you have done is attacked my opinions and tried to invalidate them. Probably because it makes you feel insecure about your own affinity for those kinds of movies.
I don't like Romance movies. Why? They don't appeal to me. That's an opinion. Would you attack that and claim I wasn't being a good boy and discussing properly? I do like sci fi films. Why? I like science fiction and that genre appeals to me. Is that not a good enough answer? I don't want to see more Disney type films. I've seen enough to last a lifetime. Part of the reason is I'm not a kid, I don't have those early aged kids any more, and I really just don't want to see those movies. I've seen enough of them. That's the basis of my opinion. Is that not good enough? I want to see something NEW. Give me something that Disney doesn't have the balls to make. Go out on a limb, be original. Is that so outrageous to ask for?
Do you see me attacking your opinion for defending the cutesy films? Nope. If you want to watch those kinds of movies, no one's stopping you. I respect that that kind of thing appeals to you. So then why is it invalid for me to simply come on here and say I'm not interested in another cutesy animation film? Why is it that I have to write 3 long posts where I have to requote myself and set people straight on what I did and did not say?
I think it boils down to the fact you just don't like my opinion. That's fine, you don't have to like it. But to spend so much time attacking it and misquoting me saddens me and makes a mockery of the crap you attempted to post about a discussion board discussing things. You're not discussing anything, you're wasting everyone's time trying to discredit what I have to say.
I find it amusing I posted the same thing a couple weeks ago in another thread about animation studios doing more sequals like Shrek 4 and extending preproduction time on animated movies. I explained myself the exact same way I did earlier and the whole thing was dropped. I guess you two weren't paying attention that day.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, what you're doing is criticizing my opinion. I've given reasons why I want to see something new and different done with animation. I've given reasons why I'm tired of the same old Disney movies. The problem is, YOU don't think they're valid.
Well, this is going nowhere, so after this I'll drop it.
The reasons you gave that TS wasn't original was basically that it's another talking-toy CGI movie. Well, that's a load of bunk in my opinion because if you set your standards for originality to that level, you'll never be pleased ever, because nothing is original by that standard.
No one said you thought people were bad people for liking TS2 was unoriginal.
Cute name play with Puffy Treat's screen name, and also a stunningly clever character analysis on your part about my poorly hidden insecurity for liking 'kids movies' such as TS2-and since you resorted to personal insults first, I'll just bluntly point out that if you believe TS2 was just a kid's movie, you either weren't paying attention when you watched it, or you're just plain ignorant.
Also, as for 'wasting time'? Always an amusing claim to make on a discussion board...especially when you look just how much I've posted in this thread, versus how much you've posted in this thread
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, lacking in any substance beyond a gut reaction though it may be. I shall now withdraw, and hide behind my insecurities for liking 'kid movies' such as TS2.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't like Romance movies. Why? They don't appeal to me. That's an opinion. Would you attack that and claim I wasn't being a good boy and discussing properly? I do like sci fi films. Why? I like science fiction and that genre appeals to me. Is that not a good enough answer?
If you are merely trying to label your position on those genres, yes they are absolutely good enough for that.
If it was an attempt to persuade or convince others of the validity of your opinion, they fail miserably. The equivalent at least for me would be,
"I think cats are stupid, and that's my opinion, but I love dogs, and that is also my opinion. That's how it is."
What else is there left to discuss?
We might propose our own opinions that are in direct opposition, and even state why, but if you hold up the "thats my opinion" sign there is not much to talk about, which makes a thread/forum essentially pointless.
You're only point of contention is that TS3 will undoubtedly be a tired old repeat of plot points and characters that have been beaten to death and people have merely pointed out that you know next to nothing about how the movie will be executed.
Now I remember distinctly the president of Pixar saying that he was VERY wary about releasing TS2 because of the EXACT same concerns you had. Lassater is not directing this movie, indeed it seems that this one is largely out of his hands. There is nothing wrong with saying, "I really think its unlikely in fact I am certain that TS3 will not life up to the standards set by the other two." People will naturally question your estimates, and hey if the movie comes out and is just as lackluster or even as bad as you think it's going to be you can say, "I told you so" and link the thread.
But for now at least acknowledge that you have an opinion, just like everyone else, and when you state it on a forum designed for discussion, that folks are GOING to ask for the schematics of your opinions and pick them apart, or perhaps even praise them.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you like seeing 'clean and wholesome' films then it will probably be right up your ally. Along with every other repetitive, unoriginal animated movie this year.
In terms of a civilized debate, stihl, this is where you start to go wrong: you imply that Rakeesh and others who like 'clean and wholesome films' ALSO would like repetitive and unorigianal films.
Which is a little insulting.
quote: I do not like to see the same 'clean and wholesome' animated film rehashed time after time after time. I won't watch them anymore, no matter how well done the animation is. Give me something cutting edge, adult, and original. Not some rehash of animals talking, or cute objects coming to life, etc.
Okay.
quote: I want real stories, and plots, not the same old same old. It can be done, it has been done to some extent in the past, and apparently isn't being planned on in the future. Instead we get yet another rehash of the same cutesy kid's stories.
But, as has been pointed out, TS1 & 2 were quite different. They weren't another rehash of the same cutesy kids stories; neither was Finding Nemo, the Incredibles, or any other Pixar film that I can think of. The plots are all different, even with the same characters.
What you seem to want is blood. Grit. Unsanitized action. That's fine. Good luck in your search for it.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
