Do You Consider Pixar Films as "Disney"?

Pongo · Jun 13, 2006

With all this talk about Midway Madness and the The Laugh Floor attractions, it got me thinking... what does everyone on the board think about the Pixar films?

The Pixar films include:

Toy Story
a bug's life
Toy Story 2
Monsters, Inc.
Finding Nemo
The Incredibles
Cars

Do you consider the Pixar features as "Disney", or are they a seperate entity in your mind?

Any feedback would be great. And let's try to keep this strictly to the films. The upcoming theme park attractions have their own threads.

Connor002 · Jun 13, 2006

Absolutely.
Not only legally, but in the Disney Spirit as well.
The old Disney Spirit, that is...

Pongo · Jun 13, 2006

Connor002 said:
Absolutely.
Not only legally, but in the Disney Spirit as well.
The old Disney Spirit, that is...

Yeah, Disney Spirit is what I'm going on here.

And I agree.

Nicole · Jun 13, 2006

Sure. I think of Pixar as almost a second-generation Disney. Not 100% the same, but the ancestry is evident.

MKCP 1985 · Jun 13, 2006

Finding Nemo is more Disney than Bambi II, IMO.

wannab@dis · Jun 13, 2006

Nicole said:
Sure. I think of Pixar as almost a second-generation Disney. Not 100% the same, but the ancestry is evident.

Ditto! :wave:

Add more musical numbers and BAM! they're Disney 100%.

please excuse the emeril connotation :lookaroun

ChuckElias · Jun 13, 2006

MKCP 1985 said:
Finding Nemo is more Disney than Bambi II, IMO.

Very well said. I really hate the Disney straight-to-video sequels. All the ones that I've seen are seriously substandard, with the exception of Lion King 1 1/2 and Mulan 2.

Tim G · Jun 13, 2006

ChuckElias said:
Very well said. I really hate the Disney straight-to-video sequels. All the ones that I've seen are seriously substandard, with the exception of Lion King 1 1/2 and Mulan 2.

And yet you don't mind sequels like Toy Story... 1 to 8449...

In the end, it's all about money... not popular demand... So there's no need for all the Awe about Pixar...

Pixar is not, and never will be Disney's long awaited messiah...

wannab@dis · Jun 13, 2006

ChuckElias said:
Very well said. I really hate the Disney straight-to-video sequels. All the ones that I've seen are seriously substandard, with the exception of Lion King 1 1/2 and Mulan 2.

If nobody bought the direct-to-video sequals... they wouldn't be made. While there's a demand, there will be a supply.

wannab@dis · Jun 13, 2006

Corrus said:
And yet you don't mind sequels like Toy Story... 1 to 8449...

In the end, it's all about money... not popular demand... So there's no need for all the Awe about Pixar...

Pixar is not, and never will be Disney's long awaited messiah...

Maybe, maybe not...

However, I think the key point that I see in your post is "long awaited"... maybe if it wasn't taking so long for the revival, Pixar wouldn't be seen as the messiah. :lookaroun

BuzzComplexCM · Jun 13, 2006

Why wouldn't you consider Pixar Disney? After all, doesn't Disney write the stories? Pixar is just providing the annimation. The movies you listed are all the brainchild of Disney writers.

ChuckElias · Jun 13, 2006

Corrus said:
And yet you don't mind sequels like Toy Story... 1 to 8449...

I'm only aware of one sequel that Pixar has made, and that was Toy Story 2. I've heard that there may be a Toy Story 3, but I don't know if that's true. The difference is that Toy Story 2 was of a high enough quality to be released theatrically; and was, IMHO, actually better than the original. My problem with Disney's other sequels (Cinderella, Tarzan and Jane, Little Mermaid, Hunchback) is that they know that they're not good enough for theatrical release. They don't bother to try to make a high quality movie. They just get it pumped out for the video market.

In the end, it's all about money... not popular demand... So there's no need for all the Awe about Pixar....

Doesn't the money have something to do with popular demand? If people didn't buy them, they wouldn't make them b/c there would be no money in it.

But I'm not in awe of Pixar. I just happen to think that they make very good movies with very good animation. Pixar movies represent the Disney ideal better than Disney's straight-to-video sequels. That was my only point.

Pongo · Jun 13, 2006

BuzzComplexCM said:
Why wouldn't you consider Pixar Disney? After all, doesn't Disney write the stories? Pixar is just providing the annimation. The movies you listed are all the brainchild of Disney writers.

...No. They don't.

All Disney did for those films was distribute them. Period.

KrazyKemp · Jun 13, 2006

Pixar movies are Disney movies in my mind.

Not only from a legal standpoint, but the feel of the films is pure Disney.

Now that the two companies are one giant animation sudio, soon we will all forget that Pixar was ever separate from Disney.

durangojim · Jun 13, 2006

Pixar is as Disney as Disney can be, especially now after the purchase. I'm proud to have my son's Pixar stock certficate framed right next to his Disney one.

dxwwf3 · Jun 13, 2006

My answer to the question:

Absolutely

wannab@dis · Jun 13, 2006

BuzzComplexCM said:
Why wouldn't you consider Pixar Disney? After all, doesn't Disney write the stories? Pixar is just providing the annimation. The movies you listed are all the brainchild of Disney writers.

I believe that's the first time I've ever heard that erroneous claim. Especially here. :lookaroun

As was mentioned... Disney only marketed and distributed the movies. They had zero input on content. Until now. :lookaroun

hardcard · Jun 13, 2006

and for 10 points, who can name the 'father' and original owner of pixar? keep in mind, disney is pixar 3rd owner...

no fair googling or wikipediaing.. anyone know ?

Tim G · Jun 13, 2006

ChuckElias said:
Doesn't the money have something to do with popular demand? If people didn't buy them, they wouldn't make them b/c there would be no money in it.

No Making films hasn't got anything to do with popular demand...

The only film made by popular demand was the re-release of Snow-White... but that was the only one...

You mean Lion King 2 1 1/2 were popular demand???
And what about Cinderella, Tarzan and Jane, Little Mermaid, Hunchback...
So if Pixar makes a sequel it's Ok.. and when DFA made one it was nothing...
Let wake you up... They were made for the money, not because people asked for it...
So it was then, and so it will be in the future... it's called business..

No, you mean in YOUR opinion you like the Pixar stuff more... get my drift???

Connor002 · Jun 13, 2006

hardcard said:
and for 10 points, who can name the 'father' and original owner of pixar? keep in mind, disney is pixar 3rd owner...

no fair googling or wikipediaing.. anyone know ?

I don't need the points, but PIXAR was spun off from Lucasfilm.

Do You Consider Pixar Films as "Disney"?

Do You Consider Pixar Films as "Disney"?

Pixar = Disney

Pixar and Disney are totally seperate in my mind

Undecided and/or Other

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member