EdwardKnoxII 0 Report post Posted November 17, 2004 http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,15357,00.html "Toy Story" Back in Play by Sarah Hall Nov 16, 2004, 3:30 PM PT Toy Story's Woody the cowboy is riding back onto the big screen, but he's about to discover there's a new sheriff in town. Disney is making good on its threats to go ahead with Toy Story 3, minus former collaborator Pixar Animation, which created the first two Toy Story films. The studios decided to go their separate ways in January after failing to come to an agreement over extending Pixar's distribution contract with the Mouse House. When Pixar walked away from Disney, it meant leaving behind the rights to the Toy Story characters and other well-loved animated characters, such as Nemo of Finding Nemo fame. Though Disney had expressed its intent to make the third installment of the Toy Story franchise without Pixar, the studio had so far held off on the project, partly out of deference to Pixar heavies Steve Jobs and John Lasseter, who did not want to lose the characters they created. However, Disney is now in the process of setting up its own digital animation studio and seems set to produce the third Toy Story under its Walt Disney Feature Animation shingle. The fact that Disney is going ahead with the project seems to lessen the chance of contract talks resuming between the Mouse House and Pixar. Meanwhile, Tom Hanks, who voiced Woody in the first two films, recently expressed reservations about coming back for a third film if Pixar wasn't involved. "I don't know," Hanks told reporters when asked if he would participate. "Quite frankly, the creative team that put together the original Toy Story was very specific and organic to the success of the process. Not that there aren't other talented people that would be involved [if another sequel was made]. That would be a bridge to cross when I come to it." It looks like the time for bridge-crossing might be at hand. Hanks' costar Tim Allen, who voiced Buzz Lightyear, said he would be game to do Toy Story 3--as long as a team as talented as Pixar helmed the project. "If they can get the magic that Pixar had, then I don't think anybody's going to complain about it," Allen said in a recent interview. However, Allen wasn't ruling out the idea that Disney and Pixar would reconcile. "I wouldn't throw out the reunification of those companies though," Allen said. "From where I sit, it's a really good marriage that had a rocky period. I don't think there's anybody that's better suited for each other." Not that Pixar is hard up for a distributor. The studio's latest release, The Incredibles, has met with, well, incredible success at the box office, smacking high-priced 'toon competitor The Polar Express to the curb. Pixar's contract with Disney formally expires next year upon the release of Lasseter's film, The Cars, but the studio can afford to play hard to get. "We are not going to make a decision until the last possible moment," Jobs told the New York Times last week. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Special K 0 Report post Posted November 17, 2004 Who has the writers? It's the terrific humor of Pixar movies that make them continually great. Hanks makes it seems that Pixar employed the writers. The witlessness of recent Disney-made animated movies would seem to back this up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UseTheSledgehammerUh 0 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 This is going to suck. Fair warning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SP-1 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 It was more than just the writing. There are alot of extremely subtle things in Pixar animation that bring everything together. Doesn't matter how well written the film is, if the animation team doesn't have that attention to detail then it's not going to work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheLastBoyscout Report post Posted November 18, 2004 "I wouldn't throw out the reunification of those companies though," Allen said. "From where I sit, it's a really good marriage that had a rocky period. I don't think there's anybody that's better suited for each other." I agree with this. Disney has a distribution empire second to none, and Pixar has been consistantly making money for them since their first film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SP-1 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 I'd argue that it's the other way around. Disney has tanked their traditional animation studio (Home on the Range anyone?) and has been relying almost completely on Pixar to churn out blockbusters for them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CBright7831 0 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 Hopefully they'll wait until next year when Eisner resigns. Then Disney and Pixar can get to talking again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UseTheSledgehammerUh 0 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 Toy Story 3 without Pixar = "Lion King 2", "Little Mermaid 2", "Jungle Book 2"...et. al Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobobrazil1984 0 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 No Pixar = No interest Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDH257 0 Report post Posted November 18, 2004 If Pixar isn't involved, I hope Hanks and Allan don't participate either. If Hanks and Allen are in it, the general public might get suckered into beliveing it's a legit sequal. If they're not, then the public will recognize it's just another cheap Disney sequal like the others mentioned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shutterspeed Report post Posted November 18, 2004 I have hope. They won't let this suck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted November 18, 2004 I have hope. They won't let this suck. Why? Disney hasn't had a good movie since the mid-90s aside from Lilo and Stitch. And think about how horrible the recent strings of Disney sequels have been. It's going to be inferior animation and inferior writing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shutterspeed Report post Posted November 18, 2004 Doesn't matter. I guarantee you that this won't suck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Amazing Rando 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2004 Hopefully they'll wait until next year when Eisner resigns. Then Disney and Pixar can get to talking again. Eisner resigning?! Thank fucking god. Hopefully they can actually throw someone in that spot that actually UNDERSTANDS WALT'S VISION instead of somebody who says "hey, this will make TONS OF MONEY!", which 9 times out of 10 causes it to completely fail, and the other 1 time is pure dumb luck...Lilo & Stitch, Pixar, Mission: Space, The Cruise Line (barring the food poisoning problems), and the few other good things that Disney has accomplished since Eisner's reign started. It drives me absolutely fucking nuts that Disney-MGM Studios was opened early to beat Universal Studios, but barely had any of it's attractions done, thus completely negating the entire point of opening early. They could have spent another two years on the park, all the while touting it as the better of the two with more attractions/shows/etc and maybe...just MAYBE...they could have delivered on it and stole away some of Universal Studio's profit...although anymore it's almost as if they share everything down there anyway. It's simply pathetic the things that could have been incredible moneymakers for Disney that turned into mediocre ones because of them fucking everything up. For example, their Animation Division... which was at one time the greatest in the world is now reduced to really campy (and crappy) stuff that is lightyears BEHIND where it could be. Sure, they throw in the neat little extra here and there, but over-all it's horrendous and almost unworthy of having the Disney name on it. I might not be able to draw very well or know all the ins and outs of the animation process, but what I do have is the common sense to know if a story is good or bad and how well it will transfer to animation. For instance, I was in Disney World in late 1999, and saw early promotional posters for "Treasure Planet" and I was in AWE. It was beauty. I for one am I big fan of animated films that LOOK good, and I saw something special there as I walked through the little exhibits and pondered over characters and background shots. When I finally saw the trailer, I was quite underwhelmed and could not believe what I was seeing. The exact same scene then played out three years later with "Brother Bear" (known as "Bear" in production) where the images and characters were amazing but the story was quite lacking, being the same story Disney has done thousands of times only in a new situation. (Then again, the same can be said for all of their "Princess" movies, but shit...THOSE movies were done WELL...while the latest batch have been done incredibly under the standard they had even ten years ago.) P.S. I am not a fan of any Disney animated sequel, outside of the Pixar ones. It's the worst form of "synergy" and it shows a complete lack of dedication or originality, outside of taking already well-liked characters and dumping them into something new. The only version of this I enjoy is "House of Mouse" on the Disney Channel, because at least that show is somewhat "smarky" (if i may steal a wrestling word). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2004 Hopefully they can actually throw someone in that spot that actually UNDERSTANDS WALT'S VISION instead of somebody who says "hey, this will make TONS OF MONEY!" The legendary fairy tale of Walt Disney has unfortunately led younger people to believe he was utterly selfless and not concerned with turning a profit. Please. Disneyland opened in the 50s with almost no water fountains so that Walt could sell more Coca-Cola. He was at least as tight-fisted as Eisner is, the only difference being they spend money differently in the rare occasions they do. Walt simply spent most his money on things the public could see or touch, while Eisner throws money on appraisals, management, branding, and all other kinds of crazy 90s business catchphrases. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Amazing Rando 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2004 Okay. Points widely taken, and the Coca-Cola fact is something I've seen written about (it's even better to know that Disney gets it's Coke for free, meaning whatever price they sell it at ... $2.50 for 20 ounces ... is all profit). But you can not deny that Disney has more problems now then they did even 20 years ago, and that they are all fixable problems, but nobody seems to do anything about them...or when they do, wrong decisions are always made. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slimm44 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2004 So if they go through with this, will the movie be in computer animation or will it just be regularly animated. I agree it will probably be somewhat like previous straight to video Disney movie sequels. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheLastBoyscout Report post Posted November 20, 2004 For all the shit people give Eisner, you cannot say he didn't save that studio. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites