I feel like the canary in the coal mine. I’ve been very uneasy about the spate of upcoming Pixar sequels – Toy Story 3 just came out, which I believe is the least of the franchise, Cars 2 is coming, Monsters, Inc 2 is on its way – and the latest bit of news about the company makes me even uneasier. According to Movieline Pixar is moving into direct to DVD business with a Cars spin-off to be called Planes.
Remember when Pixar’s John Lasseter was against this stuff? When he rescued Toy Story 2 from the ignominy of a cheapie cash-in and made one of the best animated films ever out of it? Movieline posits that a DTV Planes allows Pixar to make a buck on the Cars world’s bizarre popularity with the 2 year old set while not ‘diluting’ the cinematic franchise. I guess that makes sense, although I don’t know how much there is to dilute.
The optimist would look at this and say there’s no reason that Pixar’s usual commitment to great storytelling couldn’t shine in a DTV release. The pragmatist would understand that this is how business is done – you want more Ups, you have to deal with a couple of Planes. The cynic looks at the spate of sequels and the new DTV business and thinks that maybe we’ve seen the peak of Pixar. (EDIT TO INCLUDE: I didn’t even realize that Pixar was going back and 3Ding their old films, which was reported on Slashfilm this week. That feels sort of cynical) To quote Hunter S. Thompson: “With the right kind of eyes, you can almost see the high-water mark – the place where the wave broke and rolled back.”
31 comments
Well, since all those movies are earth shatteringly annoying, this makes no real difference.
If you believe Toy Story 3 to be the least of the franchise, your opinions about the rest of Pixar's slate are automatically invalid. How many Part 3's of any franchise have you seen that can stand shoulder to shoulder with the first 2 parts? Jedi? Fuck no. Godfather? Again, fuck no. Trek? Not even close. Ice Age? Spider Man? Lethal Weapon? Anything? If you weren't moved by Toy Story 3, especially stuff like the incinerator scene, then you weren't really a fan of the first two to begin with. And don't think for a second Lasseter is against making a buck on DTV, he just wants to make sure his people are in charge of how they make it.
Eh, until there's an UP 2: Alpha's Revenge, I think it'll be alright. But yeah, I never understood why Cars was such a hit.
Mike: Well, there's "Return of the King," but that doesn't really count for obvious reasons. The third "Back to the Future" flick was pretty good, certainly better than the second one.
But I agree that Toy Story 3 is easily on par its predecessors, and I would actually put it well ahead of the first one. Many folks lionize that one out of habit, it being the first CGI film and all, but if you go back and watch it, it's showing its age.
Cars is easily my least favorite Pixar franchise (I think that's true for most folks over 10 years of age), so I don't feel all that bad about them bastardizing it with a DTV spinoff, because as Devin says, there's not all that much to bastardize in the first place. But it does seem like a slippery slope and a sad rejoinder to the Toy Story 2 situation.
To make myself feel better, I'll quote Mariel Hemmingway at the end of "Manhattan": "Not everybody gets corrupted. You have to have a little faith in people!"
^^ agree Mike
TS 3 was easily among the best of Pixar's films.
Great part 3s:
The Good, the Bad + the Ugly /
Goldfinger /
Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkhaban /
The Bourne Ultimatum /
Honorable part 3s:
Indiana Jones and Last Crusade /
Return of the King /
Alien 3 (yes. flawed but underrated) /
Ocean's 13 /
Return of the Jedi /
No great shakes, but still decent:
Mission Impossible 3 /
Back to the Furture 3 /
Pirates 3 (a mess, but still watchable) /
Die Hard with a Vengeance
All told, a very short list. here's hoping Batman 3 makes it in.
I have a friend at Pixar. Word is, the company was not expecting CARS to catch on back in 2006, but it somehow became their most profitable movie over-all (i.e., when you combine theatrical, DVD, and the mountains of kiddie merch). CARS has become their go-to cash cow. No one at the company respects the property at all, so they consequently feel very good about whoring it. Meanwhile, the braintrust feels very fondly about MONSTERS, so the MONSTERS sequel is being treated with exponentially more respect. And they're not working on any more sequels beyond that.
There is nothing contradictory about Devin's statement. Toy Story 3 can be the least of the franchise and still be considered one of the best Part 3 films that have been made.
Not calling the "Planes" thing until I see it, but I gotta say: Toy Story 3 was by far my favorite of the series. The only one of the toy Stories that measured up, in my opinion, to the standard of Nemo, Incredibles, Rat, Wall-E, and Up.
Would be an issue if Pixar showed a decline in quality like Dreamworks. Although How to Train Your Dragon and Kung Fu Panda were both very good. I think Pixar knows what they're doing and know how to market themselves. I also agree that Toy Story 3 is the weakest one, but it was still pretty good, more than it had a right to be.
I remember watching The Little Mermaid and The Lion King and being amazed. Then I remember seeing the sequels and being amazed, for all the wrong reasons. With exceptions, sequels are creative wastelands. For every Evil Dead 2 or Godfather 2 or The Road Warrior, there are three or four Speed 2's. Toy Story was a ground breaking film that created a universe worth expanding (which they successfully did in 2 and 3). Cars is not the same quality. Cars is easily the worst of the Pixar films and its universe is just a retread of Toy Story's anyway (lets make inanimate object real characters). Plus Paul Newman is dead. Its just a shame to see a company that has proven itself to be great original story tellers, as well as monetary and critical behemoths, return to their earlier works so uniformly.
I hope this is to make $$ to finance newer, more exciting projects. This actually sounds like a project for the new Pixar Canada to flex their muscles before going into the big leagues.
REALLY???!!! A hst quote that has prettry much NOTHING to do with this article? I guess it makes a little, tiny, tad bit of sense…KINDA…but really? Pixar is supposed to be doing some stuff with Marvel pretty soon and I know THAT will kick all kinds of ass…I just had a pixar double feature today with my 2 yr old…we watched UP and WAL-E…they don't need sequels. Toy Story 3 was better than 2 and Cars, while looking good, lacked the soul of the rest of the pixar flicks…if any Pixar film NEEDS AND DESERVES a sequel it's THE INCREDIBLES…period!
ps
Devin,
I take it you got my facebook msg about 3d thor?
Yeah, you're completely, horribly wrong about TS3 – it is easily on a par with the previous two, with certain moments (the furnace etc) actually pushing it a little beyond. Dear Christ, it's ludicrous watching you tie yourself up in knots to be controversial and 'edgy'. 15 fucking years of purest gold, time after time, movie after movie, and you still manage to bring your tired, tired bile to the party.
Pixar has made direct-to-video before: BUZZ LIGHTYEAR OF STAR COMMAND. And a folow-up TV series. They've been down this road and it didn't hurt them creatively/cinematically speaking.
I'm cool with Pixar making some cash off of the stupid stupid Cars-loving children. it's not something I need to see but, as you mentioned, millions of tykes out there are crazy for it. If they want to release some stuff on the side to appeal to the "too young to tell the difference between quality filmmaking and bright colors/silly voices" crowd, good for them. Just keep it out of the theater where I might accidentally buy a ticket for it.
Also, Toy Story 3 was pretty great.
Pixar had nothing to do with the Buzz Lightyear TV show. That was all Disney, before the merger.
To quote Hunter S. Thompson: "mmmNyyyaaaaa…braaaiiinnzzzz…"
I'll worry about Pixar when they make a crap movie. Even Cars is better than most films (animated or not), and is sullied primarily for the company it must keep. I don't care if Pixar annouces Breakin' 3: The Dancin'Bee – I'll trust them until they give me good reason not to.
Cars: Mater's Tall tales has been doing the rounds on Playhouse Disney for ages. Don't understand why this signals the end of the high water mark – it's called diversifying.
I don't get the uproar that some Pixar fans are having over this. The people that are upset won't even see this, unlike their theatrical movies, this is specifically being made for the kiddies. And it's work/training ground for their Canadian studio. If it helps finance future riskier endeavors, then what's the big deal?
Who cares where TS3 aka The New Dark Knight ranks amongst the Pixar list of greatness? The point of the article is that Pixar is sucking the corporate cock just like Disney now. That's the truth. Point blank.
It's hilarious how all you have to say to piss off a toy story fanboys is: Toy Story *insert number here* wasn't that great. It's as if you slapped their mothers in the face, raped her, and then set her defiled body on fire.
They learned a lot from George Lucas, and Steve Jobs. You've got your Lightening Mcqueen Matchbox car, Your Radiator Springs Lighting McQueen, Dinoco Lighting Mcqueen, Cruisin Lighting Mcqueen, Lighting Mcqueen with a bush on it's head, Lightning Mcqueen with muddy sides. And that's just off the top of my head. There's like 40 goddamn cars in that race in the beginning, they all have Matchbox cars, and new one with the eyes that move, and trucks to haul them. They've got a goddamn taxi car. They're cars, what the fuck do they need a taxi for? They don't. It's not a movie it's a fucking catalog. And those fucking tractor cows are a motherfucker to find.
Pixar, unlike any other studio ever, has earned the right in my eyes to do whatever the fuck they want. Hell, John Lassiter could reverse cowgirl my woman and I would have to shrug and walk away defeated.
In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.
In my opinion, Toy Story 3 could arguably be called the strongest in the series. It has an absolutely perfect blend of humour, action and pathos and is more proof positive that Pixar are the undisputed masters of 4 quadrant filmmaking. Cars is the only blemish on their score card, artistically (which makes it a bit frustrating that its also their most commercially successful film).
I find comments and feedback liek teh above veyr annoying. There used to be a time when animated films were for Children, but now you have a bunch of over-grown 'man-children' who hate cartoons that cater to children. Seriously grow up – whats worng if a company makes cartoons that cater to kids? Not everything in teh world has to rotate around adults – its sad that a movie is considered 'artistically' less pure if it appeals to kids without pandering to Adults. 'UP' and 'TS3' are great examples of cartoons for adults but with little appeal for kids – hence in my mind failures, unless you consider them first and foremost as animated films for adults (In which case they then become successes). Why can't Adults grow up and let CARS also be?
What I would like to know is: Where do the cars in Cars come from? Who or what created them? Or am I asking questions that will never be answered?
I still don't get the hate for Cars. It was clearly not my favorite when it came out, but after it being on heavy rotation at my house earlier this year (I have a 2 year old daughter that loves the movie, but has recently shifted focus back to Mulan) I learned to appreciate the little details in the movie.
The one Pixar movie that leaves me cold: Ratatouille…
#2, I resent that remark about Return of the Jedi.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.