around sunday..blackcauldron85 wrote:It's made over $1,000,000,000!!!
http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... r-toy.html

around sunday..blackcauldron85 wrote:It's made over $1,000,000,000!!!
http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... r-toy.html
Yep. The Lion King sold 74.5 million tickets during its first run. Shrek 2 sold 71 million.PatrickvD wrote:what a ridiculous post!blackcauldron85 wrote:When I read what Luke had posted, I didn't quite understand...but now I do:
Why 'Toy Story 3' Is Not Actually The Highest Grossing Animated Film of All Time
http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerant ... elsections
(via disneyreport.com)
Snow White made its money across multiple decades. I think the real winner in terms of tickets sold during its original theatrical run is The Lion King.
The other day I was reading Box Office Mojo's "Around the World" report (24 August) and they reckon that the $1 billion dollar mark will be passed on Thursday or Friday. They won't know the total until Sunday or Monday (Foreign totals updated weekly for movies that have been running a while).PatrickvD wrote:around sunday..blackcauldron85 wrote:It's made over $1,000,000,000!!!
http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... r-toy.html
and 1% of the total gross is from rexcrk alone.... Pixar/Disney's "Toy Story 3 in 3D is winding down its overseas run after 12 frames offshore with a $7.4 million weekend at 4,601 venues in 44 markets for a whopping foreign cume of $621.4 million, making the animation title the eleventh biggest overseas grosser ever. Worldwide gross is $1.030 billion. ...
That description is amazing.L: Right, so we decided to put them in that situation, and once we did, I just wanted to stay true to it. I didn't want characters cracking jokes or making light of the situation. I wanted to treat it as realistically and honestly as possible. I always thought of it as a family in a plane that's going down. What are you going to do? Are you going to shriek and scream or are you going to become quiet and take your family's hands and hold them close, and go down together? I think that's what would happen. So I tried to stay truthful to that idea -- these toys facing their end with dignity. Quiet dignity. And I think it's that idea that became a very powerful idea and thing for the audience to experience.
D: It was so beautiful. The sense of urgency is so prevalent in it and I know you heard a lot of people talking about tears rolling down, for me, as well, it brings you back to moments in your own life when you feel that way. And again, I just want to congratulate you on the success. Not just the financial success, but it worked on so many levels, I really believe it will be an instant classic.
So John Carter isn't Pixar... Sorry if others already knew that.Lee Unkrich wrote: My plan is to make another film with Pixar so it will be a few years before we see anything again because it takes us about four years to make a movie. No live action for me. Pixar actually isn't doing live-action. Andrew's doing his John Carter film with Disney.
I guess that answers my question.Why is Andy or his mom not suprised that the toys appeared out of nowhere right after Andy was all worried that his mom had lost them?
Andy IS surprised. Mom is purposefully out in the hall and not quite aware of what Andy is talking about.
And something I've always wondered...I'm probably not the first person to ask this, but where is Andy's dad?
This is our most-asked question. We all have our own ideas, but we've decided that any one answer opens a can of worms and raises too many other questions. We think it's best to leave that particular question forever unanswered.
Watched Toy Story 3 for the third time and just realised something. How did Slinky get off the magnetic conveyor belt at the dump?
All the toys banded together and managed to pull him down. We had storyboarded a beat showing them getting him down, but I decided it was slowing things down and was not necessary. I thought it was better to have Woody surprised that the toys were no longer on the belt.
Mostly everyone that i have come across in the internet was expecting that Bo peep would be in Bonnie's room or something, or her mom buying her. ya know, happily ever after. Have you ever thought of adding that in?
Bo Peep is gone, and in my estimation, to a good home. Probably to one of Andy's relatives who have had a new baby. She is part of a nursery lamp. We decided not to have Bo in the film to raise the stakes for the other toys -- any one of them could be next. And we also wanted to be truthful to the fact that as we go through life, we will eventually lose friends and loved ones. It's never easy, but it's something we all have to contend with at some point.
There have been rumors that Andys mom is jesses previous owner. Is this true?
No.
Sorry about all the quotes...Is the Zurg in Toy Story 3 the same one that was in Toy Story 2? If so, where's his son Utility Belt Buzz?
It's a different Zurg.
Most surprisingly, perhaps, the Walt Disney Company has decided to take a deep breath and push Pixar’s “Toy Story 3” with all of its might. An animated film has never won the top prize — only two, “Beauty and the Beast” and “Up,” have ever been nominated — and Disney, in a decision that went all the way to Robert A. Iger, the media giant’s chief executive, has decided that “Toy Story 3” should finally be the one.
Aside from rapturous reviews and $1.1 billion in global ticket sales, “Toy Story 3” has the “it’s overdue” argument going for it. Pixar, which Disney bought in 2006, has delivered an unprecedented 11 commercial and critical hits in a row. The strategy has worked before. The best picture triumph in 2003 for “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” was seen as the Academy’s making up for overlooking the first two “Rings” installments.
Over all, Disney is readying one of the most ambitious — and expensive — Oscar onslaughts in its recent history, pushing “Alice in Wonderland”; the forthcoming “Tron: Legacy”; a new animated entry, “Tangled”; and “Secretariat,” which stars Diane Lane, in various categories.
“Is Diane Lane this year’s Sandra Bullock?” Rich Ross, chairman of Walt Disney Studios, said in an interview last month about his broader operating plans. “I don’t know. She could be.”
Please Disney, spare yourselves the trouble of pushing Alice for anything. The Academy doesn't acknowledge Burton's good movies, so why would they award a stinker like Alice?sotiris2006 wrote:A Shifting Oscar Race Heats Up
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/movie ... ref=movies
Most surprisingly, perhaps, the Walt Disney Company has decided to take a deep breath and push Pixar’s “Toy Story 3” with all of its might. An animated film has never won the top prize — only two, “Beauty and the Beast” and “Up,” have ever been nominated — and Disney, in a decision that went all the way to Robert A. Iger, the media giant’s chief executive, has decided that “Toy Story 3” should finally be the one.
Aside from rapturous reviews and $1.1 billion in global ticket sales, “Toy Story 3” has the “it’s overdue” argument going for it. Pixar, which Disney bought in 2006, has delivered an unprecedented 11 commercial and critical hits in a row. The strategy has worked before. The best picture triumph in 2003 for “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” was seen as the Academy’s making up for overlooking the first two “Rings” installments.
Over all, Disney is readying one of the most ambitious — and expensive — Oscar onslaughts in its recent history, pushing “Alice in Wonderland”; the forthcoming “Tron: Legacy”; a new animated entry, “Tangled”; and “Secretariat,” which stars Diane Lane, in various categories.
“Is Diane Lane this year’s Sandra Bullock?” Rich Ross, chairman of Walt Disney Studios, said in an interview last month about his broader operating plans. “I don’t know. She could be.”