What Happened to Originality at Pixar?
'Cars 2', 'Toy Story 3' and now 'Monsters, Inc. 2'...
We've gotten used to getting a new Pixar movie every year. Since A Bug's Life in 1998, 2005 is the only year not to bring us a new film from the animation house that started with Toy Story in 1995 and has since brought us countless memorable short films along with Oscar winning feature films WALL•E, Ratatouille, The Incredibles and Finding Nemo. To add to that list, Up is likely to take Best Animated feature this year. However, there appears to be a change in the winds.
Looking over Pixar's list of Oscar-winning feature films the one thing that stands out to me is how none of them are sequels and each of them is telling an original story. However, when I look at this year's upcoming releases I have to keep reminding myself Pixar does have a new film coming out… it's just that it's hard for me to look at Toy Story 3 as a "new" film, especially when I look at those four (soon-to-be-five) Oscar-winning films and don't see a number next to any of their names.
What's worse? In 2011 the Pixar film, again, won't be an original adventure. Instead we get Cars 2 on June 24. Perhaps you're thinking after that we'll get a new one in 2012. Wrong!
While Newt, a film centered on two endangered blue-footed newts was set to be directed by Gary Rydstrom for 2012, Disney animator Floyd Norman commented on a story at the Animation Guild Blog saying, "Oh, and Newt is dead." In reply to other questioning commenters, he simply replied, "It's not polite to provide details at this time."
With Toy Story 3 and Cars 2 on the immediate horizon and with 2012 now open for the taking you would think a passion project would be sliding in the gates. I mean, after all, that's what Pixar has done so well. Guess again.
A new report at Latino Review now brings back long-standing rumors of a Monsters, Inc. 2 and they speculate the open 2012 slot would appear to be the perfect place for it, although they do say "2012-2013 pipeline." They report their source is credible and considering this is something that's been talked about a lot, I think it's safe to run with it. There's no word on whether Pete Docter will be back to direct.
So, even if Monsters, Inc. 2 slides into 2013 that means three sequels in four years from a house that has done nothing but bring us originality year after year. Sure, Toy Story 2 was released — a film I don't personally love — in 1999, but other than that it's been nothing but new ideas executed with the utmost of precision and quality.
I expect Toy Story 3 to be a lot of fun and even enjoyed Cars more than most. However, even Cars 2 has hit newly reported bumps in the road that cite story problems and now say John Lasseter (director of the first Cars) is busy at work making sure the film is ready for next year's release date and serving as co-director alongside Brad Lewis. No worries, this happens, I just wish it was happening with characters I've yet to see on the big screen as opposed to those I've already ridden along with.
There is still hope Brad Bird's 1906, the first live-action film Pixar has placed under their banner along with funding from Disney and Warner Bros., may be ready for 2012 but last January, Jim Hill Media reported the picture still doesn't have a start date. This is due to the potential $200 million budget and the number of suits Bird has to impress with his script.
1906, for those that don't know, is set with the historical San Francisco earthquake as its backdrop. The story centers on a college student who begins to investigate the murder of his father, uncovering a web of deceit that has left the city vulnerable to the sort of fire that breaks out when the Great Earthquake of 1906 hits San Francisco.
The project was first reported all the way back in February of 2007 and later officially announced in March of 2008. The most recent report on it came in January when Blue Sky Disney offered up the following:
Time has kept ticking and [1906] seems no closer to being made than before. There is no official start date. There is no studio approval from Warner or its Disney-Pixar partnership. Yes, the Mouse is involved, but Warner is the active partner in this. The budget and length of the script are said to be problems for the Suits that weld power over Brad's fate. And there is doubt that they will give it approval. Bird has turned in at least two drafts and is awaiting a decision.
Having directed The Iron Giant, The Incredibles and Ratatouille, Bird is obviously a proven animated director, but I would suspect his untested abilities as a live-action director are part of the problem considering the size of the budget and the current economic situation. I guess there is always the possibility of him returning for the much talked about Incredibles 2. After all, Docter said he "has some ideas" back in 2009 and sequels seem to be the in thing at Pixar… right?
ADDITION: As pointed out in the first comment, The Bear and the Bow is in production for a December 2011 release. Personally I wouldn't be surprised to see that get moved to early summer 2012 as a result of the Newt departure.
Any thoughts out there? Are you fine with Pixar simply churning out sequels or are you more interested in seeing the original stories from the house we've all come to love? Sound off in the comments below.
Showing 40 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New CommentNOTE: The Facebook login option has been disabled. We apologize for any inconvenience. |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
You forget about the Bear and the Bow that's already in the pipeline for Pixar.
I really wouldn't worry about these sequels all running up against one another from Pixar. Who's to say they don't fix Newt later on down the road and we get it? It just sort of worked out this way. Had Newt remained, I don't think we'd be seeing Monsters, Inc. 2.
I'd obviously much rather watch Pixar continue to do original films year in and year out but if there's one studio that's earned the right to have a sequel or two back to back in its release schedule, it's Pixar.
Oops, you're right, I did forget about The Bear and the Bow. Added it to the article. If I had to guess I would say that one will fill in the vacant Summer 2012 slot.
I feel the same way, and this is the exact reason why I'm not that excited for "Toy Story 3". I've grown to love those characters, but I'm not so sure that I need to see them again. I'd much rather see Pixar take on something completely new. Everytime that happens, Pixar always exceeds my high expectations.
I am very excited for Toy Story 3, and I have high expectations for it (I love Toy Story 2, although I do prefer the original; the first one is probably my favorite animated film of all time). I don't really care for a Cars 2 right now, and even though I love Monsters Inc., I'm not sure how I feel about a sequel to that. I mean, where could they take the story? Ah well, anything is better than a Finding Nemo 2 (I mean, what would be the purpose in that?). That being said, I would like to see more original projects from them (I was interested in Newt).
Interesting commentary Brad. What about Andrew Stanton's live-action John Carpenter of Mars, which is Pixar and set for 2012?
Nope, that is actually now a Walt Disney Pictures solo release.
Really. Very interesting.
Well Pixar IS part of Disney, and I think…Andrew Stanton as director…I'm sure he's getting help from the Brain Trust every now and then. It's pretty much going to be Pixar. I think they just don't want Pixar to be seen as a live-action studio (Ed Catmull said that).
Dude, I CANNOT wait for John CARPENTER of Mars!!! ;)
Well, most people kinda adore Toy Story 2. So… it's not a concern. Toy Story 2, despite being a sequel and basically mirroring the story of the original, teems with originality and invention. There's no reason to believe that any other sequel that Pixar attempts will be otherwise.
But on that note, where in the hell is The Incredibles 2? That's the one Pixar film that's actually built for a sequel. Monsters, Inc 2 scares me, since the ending of the original was perfect.
Even at their worst, Pixar are good, so I guess the best I can offer here is a shrug. Bring it on.
There's nothing much wrong with your comment, but I just wonder what you mean about Toy Story 2 mirroring the story of the original. I don't see where it does that at all. Then you say it teems with originality and invention, which doesn't make sense according to the previous statement. I know you're not insulting Toy Story 2; I just don't know what you meant by the story mirroring the original.
Well, Monsters, Inc. 2 is one of my favorite animated films, but I definitely believe the story was told and nothing is necessary for addition.
A movie that could utilize a sequel is "A Bug's Life". It seems like the perfect film that is in need of a sequel… "The Incredibles" too.
This doesn't mean sequels are necessary, but how about alternating between "Original film" and "Sequel" every year?
like that they can have
Cars 2
The Bear and the Bow
Monsters, Inc. 2
Newt
Cars 3?
?????
The Incredibles 2
?????
The Incredibles 3
?????
Newt 2
and so on… it could work
By the way, Brad, I would really like for you to watch this 1 minute video of a parody of Pixar which I find really original. CollegeHumor posted it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFK_XuVqsCQ
It only takes a minute of your time,
Thanks!!
My friend showed me that one a while back, I immediately love the letters' reactions when Luxo Jr. crushes the ball and blood spurts out.
Yes to Monsters Inc. 2, no to The Incredibles(the first was horrible enough), no Cars 2, no Toy Story 4, no Up 2, no WALL-F, no Ratatouille 2. Pixar still has originality. freaking Up is nominated for Best Picture!
Pixar has said that they only make sequels if the script and idea is as good or better than the first film. Toy Story 3 was given. I feel as though Pixar is trying to redeem Cars and it's "Worst Pixar Film" tagline that's always said. If each sequel is as fantastic as Toy Story 2, I'm all for it. It's Pixar. Have they ever not had a success with critics and box office alike?
Toy Story 2 was great,so I think it'll be fine. Cars was great too so I have no problem with 2. As long as they don't push it to doing 4's or making awful sequels like Shrek The Third…
Just to be clear, I am not questioning the quality of the films. Pixar makes great films. We all know that.
I am just pointing out this is a studio I tend to look to for originality and now see three sequels in the immediate future.
Newt was a bad idea from the start. It was A Bug's Life meets Wall-e. I am a tad bit worried about Cars 2, but I mean, TS3 is a sequel that I am glad to see happening, and Monsters 2 will be good as well. Personally, I think Pixar is trying to be the first studio to top their already classic films. I mean, it's debatable whether TS1 or TS2 was better, but I have faith in Pixar to make great movies period.
I fully expect Toy Story 3 to be amazing, sequel or not. Cars 2 I'm not so excited about. In its own right, "Cars" was a great film, but next to the other masterpieces Pixar has turned out, it's definitely the "weakest" of the lot. I think they're making another, though, because the merchandising has made it the most profitable film out of the 10 they've done so far. Pity.
What about "John Carter of Mars"? Is Pixar still on for that? I thought that was supposed to be live action. This "1906" sounds pretty interesting, though.
And about the whole sequel thing: I'm not as against it as most critics seem to be. They think it's a new thing that's just popped up with Hollywood in the past 10 years, but it's not. The idea of franchises goes all the way back to ancient times, when people created sagas and mythologies, which had recurring characters doing a whole bunch of adventures in multiple episodes, etc. I mean, the fucking "Odyssey" is a sequel. "The Lord of the Rings" is a sequel to "The Hobbit" (I'm talking about the books here). And think how many sequels Arthur Conan Doyle did to the original Sherlock Holmes story. A whole fucking lot. It's in our nature to do sequels, and it has been for thousands of years. It's just they went by a different name before. I don't think it's taking the easy way out, choosing to make a sequel over an original film. And I won't call anyone a sellout for making a sequel. I'll only start getting critical once the film comes out and it's bad, and not before.
I wrote it above, but John Carter is Disney solo, Pixar is not involved.
I'm certain Pixar will not abandon the original concepts/films. They're probably having some brainstorming sessions for ideas much like they did before which led to concepts that eventually became Wall-E, Ratatouille, and Up. I don't have a problem with 3 out of their next 4 films being sequels. They've taken their time with the sequels, which is something that can't be said with the other studios.
Exactly! I think we can all be sure that sequel or not, Pixar would produce some amazing quality films like they have always done.
And I think Pixar would have soo much fun with the sequels as there not much pressure when compared to releasing something original.
Thats what Toy story 2 was, Just a plain fun movie with that Pixar touch.
I think the business model of Pixar doing a sequel one year and then an original movie the next year sounds plausible.
Pixar have done a great job making original movies, and now that they have established themselves it is only natural for them to go back to the movies that made them. It is a more financially viable to make sequels than to market new, original ideas.
I don't necessarily agree that it's more financially viable to make sequels than to market new ideas, especially not when the Pixar name is attached to that new original property. If it says Pixar on the film, my butt is in the theater. They have proven that their original properties will bank time and again.
I think that this is more a case of the well running a little low on ideas, however not necessarily dry yet. I am happy to abide some sequels from Pixar while they brainstorm some new material, and I will go see every sequel they put out until they release a bad one, and I really don't see that happening.
As long as the stories are as good as ever, I won't be concerned. It's that simple. Bring 'em on, just bring 'em good. However, here's hoping that Andrew Stanton and Brad Bird return to Pixar after their respective live-action outings, 'cause it's those two who made Pixar's best films ever, in my opinion.
"Any thoughts out there? Are you fine with Pixar simply churning out sequels or are you more interested in seeing the original stories from the house we've all come to love?"
Wow. Could that question be any more loaded?
Personally, I don't care. Pixar's never dissappointed. My only question is, why make a sequel to "Monsters, Inc." when you could be making a sequel to "The Incredibles"?
Pixar didn't have a film in 2002.
Also are you sure about 1906 being a Pixar film? I've been under the impression that like "John Carter of Mars", people have just been confused into thinking it's a Pixar film due to who's involved.
There was also never a Pixar film in 2000. The writer missed out on two years.
It is more than due time for "Incredibles 2". Practically built to be a franchise. Somehow they invented the most awesome villians too, and 2 were only in the beginning and ending respectively. There are a million directions this could go, at least 1 more is needed already.
I definitely love the original movies Pixar has done. Ratatouille is one of my all-time favorite animations.
I was never a fan of Toy Story, so I'm not likely to be keen on numero 3. I did have one son who was Buzz and frequently travelled, "to infinity and beyond."
No more sequels, please.
Toy Story 3 looks great. I'll give them that.
Cars was a masterpiece (in my opinion). No sequel nessecary.
Monsters Inc. had a perfect ending. Why ruin it with a goddamn sequel that doesn't even make sense?
I'm not really crazy about The Incredibles, but that'd be the only sequel that would even have potential to work.
I've been clamoring for a Crush spin-off for years. It's original, yet still based on a very profitable existing intellectual property.
Why abandon Newt?! I was rather excited for that.
I'm not yet sold on The Bear and the Bow, but it sounds better than another sequel.
I'm not the hugest of Pixar fans, but they're usually solid.
Toy Story – A
A Bug's Life – D
Toy Story 2 – B+
Monsters Inc. – A-
Finding Nemo – A
The Incredibles – C+
Cars – A+
Ratatouille – B-
Wall-E – A+
Up – C
Not that you care, but here's my grading:
Toy Story-A++
A Bug's Life-B+
Toy Story 2-A+
Monsters Inc.-A
Finding Nemo-A
The Incredibles-A+
Cars-B-
Ratatouille-A-
WALL-E-A
Up-A+
As you can tell, I have enjoyed all of Pixar's movies, and I absolutely LOVE Toy Story. Toy Story 2 is not far behind. I really love The Incredibles, and I enjoy Ratatouille a lot (ironically, I didn't care much for those two when they first came out. I enjoy them much better now because I understand all the jokes, etc.). I absolutely loved Up as well. I know the talking dogs (or the dogs flying planes) bugged a lot of people, but I thought they were nice touches. I loved Carl Fredericksen, Russell, Dug, and Kevin. It was just a lot of fun for me. Even though Cars is my least favorite, I still enjoy it quite a bit.
Does Pixar care what you 20-40 year old people think of what movies they should make? I don't think so. Ask my 2,5 year old if he wants a "cars 2"….He does. Im all for originality but I have no issues with Pixar giving us more of Lightning Mcqueen or "Blixten Mcqueen" as he is know as in Sweden. 2011 will be an epic year for my son. Thank you Pixar
I'll second Tommy, above. My 2 1/2 year old adores Cars. While it wasn't my favorite to start, repeated viewings have created an increased fondness for the movie. If it was as bad as everyone says, I would have "misplaced" it by now.
I've got Toy Story 1 and 2 on my DVD shopping list so I can introduce my son to them before the new movie comes out. Most likely, TS3 will be the first theater movie we attend together. I'm looking forward to all of the sequels!
All I care about is The Incredibles 2. If any Pixar movie screamed for a sequel it's The Incredibles. I can respect the "be original first" attitude Pixar has had over the years, but now that they're on the sequel bandwagon the fact they're on to Toy Story 3, planning Monsters, Inc. 2 and, heaven help us, Cars 2 makes me wonder exactly what the problem and / or delay is.
I want The Incredibles 2 really bad, but I think they're waiting for the film to grow up (like toy story) then release it. I think I would rather see The Incredibles sequel if the characters were a little bit older. I would also like to add that I was looking forward to watch Newt. Hopefully it's a bunch of rumors going around. Monsters Inc. 2 ??? really you guys? why would you say that you want a monsters sequel? That movie was PERFECT from beginning to end. why risk a sequel? Im not a sequel person because I enjoy originality and new characters, but i have to say that Toy Story 3 (although i doubted it) looks bad ass. Lets just all remember ONE thing. It's Pixar! They won't mess anything up because they can't. That's how good they are!
I want to rate my movies too!
Toy Story- A (First movie I ever saw in theaters (5yearsOld))
A Bug's Life- A
Toy Story 2- A+
Monsters Inc.- A+
Finding Nemo- A+
The Incredibles- A
Cars- C+
Ratatouille- A
WALL-E- B
Up- A
WOW! I WISH THOSE WERE MY SCHOOL GRADES!
I gave WALL-E a B because of the music… sorry. Other pixar movies have great scores and original music. WALL-E had the whole Hello Dolly music going on that didn't excite me. Oh yeah, same with Cars. That music sucked. Up, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo and Monsters inc. had solid audio. haha i almost listed all movies as best audio.
Pixar has most certainly not had a movie every year since A Bug's Life except for 2005. As a previous poster pointed out there was no Pixar movie in 2000 or 2002. Only since 2006 has Pixar managed a movie per year (Cars, Ratatouille, WALL•E, Up, and now Toy Story 3).
But to the meat of your argument, why can't a sequel be original? The Empire Strikes Back, The Godfather Part II, The Two Towers & Return of the King, The Dark Knight, and yes Toy Story 2 all fleshed out their predecessors with enjoyable stories that teemed with originality and brilliance that made them just as beloved–if not more so– than the movies that started their respective series.
I believe that if the braintrust at Pixar didn't think these sequels were worthwhile additions to the Pixar canon they would not be producing them. They have very high standards for themselves. This is not the same as Dreamworks making Shrek and Madagascar sequels simply because it's profitable. These are people who care about the movies they make for the sake of the movies, not the money.
And considering that no one at Pixar has made an official statement about Newt, I think that for the time being we should consider it to still be an active project. Likewise, until there is an official announcement of Monsters Inc. 2, let's continue to refer to it as the rumored Monsters Inc. sequel.
I liked sequels. I say they are fine. If they are good, even better and it seems like it is stated that Pixar knows what it's doing, but with the fact that Wall-E and Bolt or Up and Bolt-can't really remember which 2 it was- came out at once both from Pizar and also you look at when they did Meet the Robinsons and then Rattatoulle, or however you spell it-I believe- in the same year also. I think sequels are just a thing right now and Pixar, and/or Disney, can and will do other new and original stories aside from these films.
I think people just want to see continuations of the classics that started it all and so they are giving the world what it wants, but I wouldn't doubt that this is all Pixar wants to live off of for years to come, because you can only go so far with sequels.
So give it time and more will come and then things will stay like they were before the sequels.