Finding Nemo sequel: Finding Dory

Adam5897

Active Member
I'm not against sequels, it's what they're making sequels to. Cars did not need a sequel. Monsters Inc. did not need a sequel. And Finding Nemo most certainly does not need a sequel. Now the Incredibles was practically MADE for a sequel. I'm seriously very shocked that Pixar didn't cash in on it as a franchise.
I completely agree. Like if anything the incredibles in my opinion needs a sequel. Like how could you not with the movie ending with another villain emerging and that's it. I do think we will see an incredibles sequel in the future but not for a couple of years...unfortunately...
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I'm not against sequels, it's what they're making sequels to. Cars did not need a sequel. Monsters Inc. did not need a sequel. And Finding Nemo most certainly does not need a sequel. Now the Incredibles was practically MADE for a sequel. I'm seriously very shocked that Pixar didn't cash in on it as a franchise.
Such decisions are made using metrics unrelated to story. You don't even need to have seen the film to decide!
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
The movie is a sequel, but it will deal with Dory's past at some point. That might be where some confusion is coming from about prequel/sequel. This is from the press release:


"Director and Pixar veteran Andrew Stanton takes audiences back to the extraordinary underwater world created in the original film. "There is no Dory without Ellen," said Stanton. "She won the hearts of moviegoers all over the world-not to mention our team here at Pixar. One thing we couldn't stop thinking about was why she was all alone in the ocean on the day she met Marlin. In 'Finding Dory,' she will be reunited with her loved ones, learning a few things about the meaning of family along the way."

According to Stanton, "Finding Dory" takes place about a year after the first film, and features returning favorites Marlin, Nemo and the Tank Gang, among others. Set in part along the California coastline, the story also welcomes a host of new characters, including a few who will prove to be a very important part of Dory's life."
 

Mickey_777

Well-Known Member
"Finding Dory", in my ever so humble opinion, is the lamest title I've ever heard. Everybody's still gonna call it Finding Nemo 2 regardless. Why make Dory the new star of the film? She didn't steel the show in the first one. I mean, did she sell a lot of merchandise? Did Nemo not resonate with the viewing audience as hoped? I don't get it. I don't get the need to put Dory out in front of this one. Dory hasn't done anything to merit being in the title even if she doesn't turn out to be the main protagonist. If the only story line they could come up with was a Dory "spinoff" for a sequel then somebody is slackin' over at Pixar. Just my ever so humble opinion slash 2 cents.
 

216bruce

Well-Known Member
You forgot toy story 2 which was done in 1999 but nobody seems to hate that one :/ Cars 2 did suck but I have hope for monsters university and the nemo sequel I think they are going to be great additions to the pixar line up!
No problem with sequels if they are good, but I'd prefer something new.
 

PirateFrank

Well-Known Member
Don't be so negative about this sequel. The only bad sequel they have done was Cars 2, and the animators knew it was bad but they did it solely for the merchandising and the box office cash.

This is still a mind-set that I find completely baffling. If you want to make the point that Cars2 had some issues, despite significant box office earnings, I'll certainly agree. (and for the record novawildcat18, it's clear to me you're making the argument from a position of movie-quality over movie-success - I'm just pivoting on your post to make my point - hope you don't mind).

What baffles me is that Cars-2 was pretty much John Carter'ed. Before it was ever released, it was being panned as Pixar's first big F-up. Yet despite the massive lambasting it got in reviews and how numerous articles were written about how Pixar has lost its way, it still grossed more than Wall-E, Brave, Toy Story 2, Cars 1 & Wreck-it-Ralph...and it sits just underneath Monsters, Inc on the world-wide gross list (separated by only $2.7M). (http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/)

Now, I will agree that Cars 2 had some issues -- namely plot and characterization issues. However, I can still sit through the movie and enjoy it for what it is. I have *never* been able to sit through Brave without either falling asleep or pulling out the ipad to read something far more interesting (like wikipedia articles about the mating habits of field mice).

What baffles me is that a movie like Brave is heralded as a 'success' despite grossing nearly $30M less than Cars 2, which will go down in history as Pixar's Bill Buckner. o_O

I've often considered the possibility behind Cars 2's huge "failure" was retribution/retaliation for the success of Cars. The hollywood press does *not* resonate with stories of big city characters getting lost in jerk-water USA, befriending farting idiots and discovering 'self' while learning how to play in the dirt. Who knows, perhaps the hollywood elite never thought Cars would amount to anything, given the pov I just outlined? Who knows! But I really feel that the hollywood elite strongly resented the success of Cars, given that it doesn't fit the current narrative coming out of the coasts -- in that that the flyover states are filled with backwards idiot hillbillies with zero relevance.

So when Cars 2 began ernest development, we started hearing rumblings about Cars 2 having 'issues.' Yes, some were real, but some were wishful thinking...However, by the time the movie was nearing release, the rumblings turned to deafening roars. There was *no* way the Hollywood elite were going to allow another movie about Jerk-water USA winning in the Box Office. In fact, I suspect that's why Lasseter took Cars 2 in an international direction, plot-wise - a mild hedge against the review threat (despite it being a very big mistake for the sake of the quality of the movie).
 

imagineer boy

Well-Known Member
Anyone else notice that whenever they make sequels they make the marketable comic-relief side kicks the main focus of them? In Cars 2 it mostly focused on Mater and Lightning McQueen was barely in the movie. Don't know for sure yet, but it looks like Monsters University is focusing mostly on Mike. And clearly by the title Finding Nemo 2 is going to be all about Dory.

What's next? A Bug's Life 2: Heimlich's Butterfly Adventure? Incredibles 2: Edna Mode Back in Action? Ratatouille 2: Emile Eats Everything? Up 2: Dug's Big Adventure?
 

Mickey_777

Well-Known Member
Anyone else notice that whenever they make sequels they make the marketable comic-relief side kicks the main focus of them? In Cars 2 it mostly focused on Mater and Lightning McQueen was barely in the movie. Don't know for sure yet, but it looks like Monsters University is focusing mostly on Mike. And clearly by the title Finding Nemo 2 is going to be all about Dory.

What's next? A Bug's Life 2: Heimlich's Butterfly Adventure? Incredibles 2: Edna Mode Back in Action? Ratatouille 2: Emile Eats Everything? Up 2: Dug's Big Adventure?

Goodness let's hope not. You're right about Cars 2 but I hope Monsters University (more of a prequel) is different and gives the stars even screen time.
 

BoarderPhreak

Well-Known Member
Wait, who are we looking for again?

:D

As an aside - if you haven't checked out "Finding Nemo - the Musical" at AK yet... DO! Walked in on a whim and it was not only adorable, but of a great production quality - with live actors, singing, etc. Very pleasantly surprised.
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
What baffles me is that Cars-2 was pretty much John Carter'ed. Before it was ever released, it was being panned as Pixar's first big F-up. Yet despite the massive lambasting it got in reviews and how numerous articles were written about how Pixar has lost its way, it still grossed more than Wall-E, Brave, Toy Story 2, Cars 1 & Wreck-it-Ralph...and it sits just underneath Monsters, Inc on the world-wide gross list (separated by only $2.7M). (http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/)

That's all do to inflation and 3-D ticket prices. Cars 2 was the least attended Pixar movie ever, which means fewer people went to the theatres to see it than any other.
 

PirateFrank

Well-Known Member
That's all do to inflation and 3-D ticket prices. Cars 2 was the least attended Pixar movie ever, which means fewer people went to the theatres to see it than any other.


I'm sorry, you need to support that statement with something approaching fact. I specifically chose movies that are comparable in one way or another to Cars 2....including pixar films in release both immediately *after* cars 2 or *just* before, each with 3D offerings.
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, you need to support that statement with something approaching fact. I specifically chose movies that are comparable in one way or another to Cars 2....including pixar films in release both immediately *after* cars 2 or *just* before, each with 3D offerings.

How is 1999, 2001 or 2006 "just" before 2011?

How is ignoring inflation or 3-D ticket prices "fact".

It's also convienient of you to ignore the domestic/foreign split, especially when studios earn more of a % here than elsewhere and that's a key for determining success.

I'll come talk box office figures when you have a consistent and realistic set of paramaters for judgement.
 

StarWarsGirl

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I'm seeing an inflation argument here. And since I'm taking Macro economics and just talked about inflation in class, I will clarify inflation:

There is generally an inflation rate every year. However, not all prices go up evenly at the rate. This is why inflation can be bad as a cost to society. Prices do not adjust evenly. Although prices have gone up in some areas, movie ticket prices, at least in my area, have stayed at $10 for at least four years. So really, you can't blame inflation for discrepancies in films that were produced within a few years of each other. Especially when you're comparing on such a large scale and you don't have inflation rate per year nor prices for individual firms.

Plus, the inflation rate is about 2.5% each year. So a movie ticket that cost $10 in 2010 would cost $10.03 in 2011. Does it make sense to account for inflation when the price change is so absolutely slow? No. If we were experiencing hyperinflation, it would be a different story, but that usually only occurs when the government prints too much money.

So now, let's compare the subject of the argument, Cars 2, to other recent Pixar films. Directly from Wikipedia, verified with a citation:
Cars 2 grossed $191,452,396 in the USA and Canada, and $368,400,000 in other territories for a worldwide total of $559,852,396.[2] Worldwide on its opening weekend it grossed $109.0 million, marking the largest opening weekend for a 2011 animated title.[49] Overall, Cars 2 became sixth biggest Pixar film in terms of worldwide box office among twelve released.

Brave earned $237,283,207 in North America, and $298,100,000 in other countries, for a worldwide total of $535,383,207.[2] It is the thirteenth highest-grossing film of 2012,[47] the eighth highest-grossing Pixar film,[48] and the third highest-grossing animated film that year
In other words, they were almost equally successful. By comparison:
Toy Story 3 earned $415,004,880 in North America, and $648,167,031 in other countries, totaling $1,063,171,911 worldwide, earning more revenue than the previous two films combined.

Now, what about 3D tickets? Yes they help. But not all firms sell them at the same price. I went to a theater in PA to see Brave, and because they were only showing it in 3D for some reason, they charged us the same as it would have been to see it in 2D. Plus, many of the more recent films have also been released in 3D, so you can't try to account for inflation or 3D between films like Brave and Cars 2. You should, however, account for it when comparing movies that were made 5 or more years apart.

Questions?

Also, Toy Story made $538,640,663.62 in today's ( or 2011's) dollars worldwide, if you want to compare that to Cars 2. Or Brave. Or any others that were made in the past three or four years.

So yes, Cars 2 did well, especially for being so poorly reviewed.
 

StarWarsGirl

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
How is 1999, 2001 or 2006 "just" before 2011?

How is ignoring inflation or 3-D ticket prices "fact".

It's also convienient of you to ignore the domestic/foreign split, especially when studios earn more of a % here than elsewhere and that's a key for determining success.

I'll come talk box office figures when you have a consistent and realistic set of paramaters for judgement.
If you really want, here's an inflation calculator. Punch in the numbers for yourself. Data is available on Wikipedia or at boxofficemojo.com as to how the films grossed, not already accounting for inflation. Though as I explained above, this wouldn't be a precise calculation, it would give you some general figures.

You spelled convenient wrong. Sorry, being a grammar Nazi.;)
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
If you really want, here's an inflation calculator. Punch in the numbers for yourself. Data is available on Wikipedia or at boxofficemojo.com as to how the films grossed, not already accounting for inflation. Though as I explained above, this wouldn't be a precise calculation, it would give you some general figures

Box Office Mojo has their own inlfation caluclated figures, which I trust are more accurate than general inflation sites for the reasons you've mentioned. They've already done the break down domestically and it shows Cars 2 at the bottom (or 2nd last when not adjusting).

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=pixar.htm

Foreign they've yet to do, but using the same % difference as domestic (which has potential to not be accuarte as not all currencies have the same levels of inlfation difference) it would be easy to demonstrate how Cars 2 would drop in the ranks. It's also safe to assume that movies in 1995, 1998, 1999 and 2001 would all have very different numbers than 2011. The only Pixar title with a foreign total that Cars 2 would for sure outrank (which is where this whole argument started with my statement) would be Brave, and that's not by a wide margin.

And as I've said before, the % of earnings is different between domestic and foreign, so even if Cars 2 did well overseas, if it underperfomred in the US, that's still reason for Disney to be disapointed.

You spelled convenient wrong. Sorry, being a grammar Nazi.;)

I still can't get this site's spell check to work, are there any others with that problem? :confused:
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom