The buzz: 2 'Toy Story' sequels

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Walt Disney Co. is working on not just one but two new sequels in the "Toy Story" series at the same time, Disney chief executive Michael Eisner said yesterday.

"Toy Story," which came out in 1995, and 1999's "Toy Story 2" were blockbuster film and merchandising hits for Pixar Animation Studios, the Disney partner that produced it, and for Disney.

But that partnership is ending after two more films, giving Disney the right to craft sequels if Pixar does not want to.

"We're doing two 'Toy Stories' at once," Eisner said in listing some of Disney's film plans at a Goldman Sachs investment conference in Manhattan.

A spokeswoman in Los Angeles for Disney studios later elaborated, saying, "They're working on different story ideas with the hopes there will be a 'Toy Story 3' and another after that."

A Pixar spokeswoman declined to comment.

The partnership's next computer-animated film is "The Incredibles," which debuts Nov. 5 and which Eisner predicts will be a "giant blockbuster."

Disney is trying to rev up its own computer animation department because traditional animation has fared poorly in recent years. Among its computer animation plans, Disney is producing "Chicken Little," which Eisner said will cost half as much as competitors spend on such films.

Still, the question remains whether on its own, Disney can come close to Pixar's unbroken streak of huge triumphs with computer-animated films.

Eisner said an enormous amount of computer-animated movies will spill forth from Hollywood in the next few years, but victory will boil down to story-telling and emotion, rather than just technology.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
General Grizz said:
Pixar didn't make these films; I'm not gonna see them.


That is rather short-sighted Grizz......we have no idea what these films will be like....but go ahead, die on the sword for your beliefs, I am sure WDC will miss your $8 :rolleyes:
 

General Grizz

New Member
speck76 said:
That is rather short-sighted Grizz......we have no idea what these films will be like....but go ahead, die on the sword for your beliefs, I am sure WDC will miss your $8 :rolleyes:
Not 8 dollars. . . 16 dollars; there are *two* more movies. :zipit:

Short-sighted? Perhaps. But I do not support these actions of Eisner & Co. . . sure, they'll make a buck, but they are slapping Pixar and leading themselves to die on their OWN swords. :D
 

Shaman

Well-Known Member
I really like the fact that Disney is trying the whole computer animation thing on their own...I just hope the movies are good...

When I see things like:

"Among its computer animation plans, Disney is producing "Chicken Little," which Eisner said will cost half as much as competitors spend on such films."

That worries me...I mean cheap is not bad if the story and storytelling do not suffer from the small budget....movie goers don't like to spend their money on expensive movie tickets to see "cheap" movies...

If they follow the same philosophy they have taken with their recent 2D films...they will fail with their 3D releases...and if that happens one can only imagine what Eisner will try to blame....perhaps he'll say 3D isn't hot anymore....

It would have been nice though, if Pixar and Disney still remained partners....even if Disney went out on their own at the same time...the two at one time would have been possible I think....just my opinion....
Let see what happens.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
objr said:
I really like the fact that Disney is trying the whole computer animation thing on their own...I just hope the movies are good...

When I see things like:

"Among its computer animation plans, Disney is producing "Chicken Little," which Eisner said will cost half as much as competitors spend on such films."

That worries me...I mean cheap is not bad if the story and storytelling do not suffer from the small budget....movie goers don't like to spend their money on expensive movie tickets to see "cheap" movies...

If they follow the same philosophy they have taken with their recent 2D films...they will fail with their 3D releases...and if that happens one can only imagine what Eisner will try to blame....perhaps he'll say 3D isn't hot anymore....

It would have been nice though, if Pixar and Disney still remained partners....even if Disney went out on their own at the same time...the two at one time would have been possible I think....just my opinion....
Let see what happens.

I kind of like the increased competition that an independant Pixar will bring. With more and more studios getting into the CGI animation (due to the lower costs and quicker turn-around time) the competition will be fierce, and competition breeds innovation!
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
I simply do not get any other feeling about two Disney-created Toy Story sequels than.... cheapquels. Plus, they are lining up two POTC sequels. And let's not forget Bambi 2, Mulan 2 (and 3).... there's even a rumor of a Snow White sequel. I guess what it boils down to for me is, has Disney no creativity left? Is it an atmosphere of, "Let's throw out xx movies and see what sticks, and then market/sequel it to death"? If they could still tell a story like they could prior to 2000, they wouldn't have half the movie problems (animation and live-action flopping, with few exceptions) they have. Pixar doesn't have a problem with story. Or presentation. Or management. They are going to set the standard in the coming years, unless Disney can figure out how to remove management's heads from their collective a$$es.
 

NemoRocks78

Seized
Premium Member
2 sequels? Well, they both will hopefully be better than that horrible 2nd one.

It will be sad not seeing the Pixar tag on it though.... :cry:
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
General Grizz said:
Pixar didn't make these films; I'm not gonna see them.

I'm going to have to agree there. Short sighted, yes, but I'm at a point where I don't trust Disney in the sequel department. They've failed to deliver proper sequels since the beginning so this should be no exception.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
I'm going to have to agree there. Short sighted, yes, but I'm at a point where I don't trust Disney in the sequel department. They've failed to deliver proper sequels since the beginning so this should be no exception.


But have not previous sequels been direct-to-video? I do not remember, with the exception of Fantasia 2000, any sequel being release in the theaters.
 

Lauriebar

Well-Known Member
Does anyone else find it somewhat laughable that Eisner says the Disney produced movies will be cheaper to make and then turns around and says that victory will come down to storytelling and emotion? Aren't these two things in direct contrast to each other?
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Lauriebar said:
Does anyone else find it somewhat laughable that Eisner says the Disney produced movies will be cheaper to make and then turns around and says that victory will come down to storytelling and emotion? Aren't these two things in direct contrast to each other?

Not at all!

Last that I looked, storytelling and emotion did not require a huge budget....look at movies like Chicago, which won an Oscar, and only cost $45 million to make, compare that to Catwoman, which cost over $100 million.....
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
But have not previous sequels been direct-to-video? I do not remember, with the exception of Fantasia 2000, any sequel being release in the theaters.

Peter Pan 2, Jungle Book 2, The rescuers Down Under. I think there was one more.....

Fantasia 2000 in my eyes was a true, worthy sequel. The only one imo...
 

Lauriebar

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
Not at all!

Last that I looked, storytelling and emotion did not require a huge budget....look at movies like Chicago, which won an Oscar, and only cost $45 million to make, compare that to Catwoman, which cost over $100 million.....

Alright...let's then look at the last few Disney animated films, with a few exceptions, they had no story or heart. Surely Disney animation can do better than "Home on the Range". The quality of recent Disney projects have, in my opinion, not been up to par with the rich heritage that is Disney.

Let me also say that Chicago was a musical long before it was a movie and much of it's success could very well be due to the fact that the story was already there and proven. What we are talking about here is creating original stories and that takes time and money.


Oh and...day

(just waiting for you to say night:p )
 

CrackerJack

Member
Some Suggestions For Disney Animation:

1. Realize the importance of great music in features - I believe that the most important feature in a Disney film is the music. Compare B&TB, Little Mermaid, Mary Poppins, Lion King, etc. with Atlantis, Home on the Range, and Treasure Planet. Good music is a key. Experiencing Mickey's Philharmagic shows the importance of Disney music.

2. Stories with hero's and villians. No wishy-washy stuff here. Give us true hero's and villians. Someone to root for and someone to root against. It certainly worked for LOTR.

3. Look into hiring the guy behind "Sky Captain". What a coup that could be for the future of animated film. Imagine what could be done if he actually had a decent script ... with a plot.

4. Rebuild ties with Pixar. Dreamwork is enough competition in the animated field. I don't think Disney really wants to compete with Pixar. While I agree that it could be good for innovation, I also believe that Disney doesn't need the added competition. They may find themselves on the short end ...

5. Realize that CGI isn't going to be the saviour of the animation world. In 10 years, any yahoo with a computer is going to be able to make these films. While this may result in some good independent releases, it will also fill the screen with large amounts of blecch. Once again, story, characters, music ...

Just my humble opinions. Unfortunately I feel that the Disney board is more concerned with cost cutting than providing quality motion pictures. The bigger problem is that good movies can lead to good WDW rides. But you need a good movie first.

Imagine a movie done in the style of "Sky Captain" with good characters, plot and especially music. Then moving that to a ride platform where the rider can be immersed in that world.

Oh well, a guy can dream can't he?
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Lauriebar said:
Alright...let's then look at the last few Disney animated films, with a few exceptions, they had no story or heart. Surely Disney animation can do better than "Home on the Range". The quality of recent Disney projects have, in my opinion, not been up to par with the rich heritage that is Disney.

Let me also say that Chicago was a musical long before it was a movie and much of it's success could very well be due to the fact that the story was already there and proven. What we are talking about here is creating original stories and that takes time and money.

Ok, well, the Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin.....all based on previous works, and all had heart and a good story. Maybe Disney NEVER had the ability to create "story and heart" :confused:

Also, look at the price tags on the last few movies.....I fail to see a relationship between budget and story/heart.

Home on the Range $110million

Brother Bear $90million

Treasure Planet (I think this movie had heart, but it too was based on previous works) $140million

Atlantis TLE: $120million

Lilo & Stitch (I think this movie had heart/story too) $80million

Dinosaur $127.5million- $200million

The Emperor's New Groove $100million
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
Maybe Disney NEVER had the ability to create "story and heart" :confused:

*coughLionKing,BrotherBear,Lilo&Stitchcough*

:p

BTW, I fail to see why a film like The Emperor's New Groove cost so much. The animation was medicore at best, storyline was weak and so was acting... :rolleyes:
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
*coughLionKing,BrotherBear,Lilo&Stitchcough*

:p

BTW, I fail to see why a film like The Emperor's New Groove cost so much. The animation was medicore at best, storyline was weak and so was acting... :rolleyes:

Ok, in your coughing, you picked the two cheapest films on the list, bringing me back to my point of "there is no relationship between budget at story/heart"

I too fail to see why The Emperor's New Groove cost so much, except that it has a lot of celebrity voices.
 

Lauriebar

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
Ok, well, the Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin.....all based on previous works, and all had heart and a good story. Maybe Disney NEVER had the ability to create "story and heart" :confused:

Also, look at the price tags on the last few movies.....I fail to see a relationship between budget and story/heart.

Home on the Range $110million

Brother Bear $90million

Treasure Planet (I think this movie had heart, but it too was based on previous works) $140million

Atlantis TLE: $120million

Lilo & Stitch (I think this movie had heart/story too) $80million

Dinosaur $127.5million- $200million

The Emperor's New Groove $100million

You are spending so much time attacking my post that you are not seeing my true point. I will not back down from my feeling that Disney Animation is going nowhere right now. It's o.k. for me to feel disappointed with the quality of the product that is being put out. You make your point with statistics, that's great, but statistics don't always show the big picture. I was not implying that there is a direct corrolation between money spent and quality of story. Does a good budget help? Sure. Can a terrific movie be made on the cheap? Sure. There is no black or white here. I am not attacking Eisner just for the fun of it. I am not a sheep without a mind of my own going along with the group. I simply find it ironic that Eisner can be so cocky in his statement about the quality of Disney movies (sequels to be exact) when the recent past has proven otherwise. He needs to back up this statement with a quality story. I'll believe it when I see it.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom