Pixar Is Making More Sequels

[lord-of-sith]

Contrary to the topic of this thread, this article indicates that Pixar is planning on slowing down on the sequels.

http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/pixar-sl ... quels.html

“For artistic reasons … it’s really important that we do an original film a year. Every once in a while, we get a film where we want or people want to see something continuing in that world — which is the rationale behind the sequel. They want those characters, which means we were successful with them. But if you keep doing that, then you aren’t doing original films.”

[Lnds500]

Contrary to the topic of this thread, this article indicates that Pixar is planning on slowing down on the sequels.

http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/pixar-sl ... quels.html

“For artistic reasons … it’s really important that we do an original film a year. Every once in a while, we get a film where we want or people want to see something continuing in that world — which is the rationale behind the sequel. They want those characters, which means we were successful with them. But if you keep doing that, then you aren’t doing original films.”

It's the exact same thing. They are slowing down compared to the last 4 years. The sequel-fest will continue though.

"Artistic reasons" my a**. You know what's even more artistic? No sequels.

[Sotiris]

Contrary to the topic of this thread, this article indicates that Pixar is planning on slowing down on the sequels.

While that technically is correct, in the long run it's not. It will look like they're cutting down on sequels at first because they're increasing their output per year (every other year they'll release two films instead of one). However, unlike before where sequels were produced at an irregular pace with Pixar claiming "we'll only do a sequel when we find a great story to tell", now they will systematically produce sequels every other year as part of their business model.

[PatrickvD]

My problem is not per se with the sequels, but more with the fact that they're making way too many movies. We all know what happened when Disney went trigger happy and increased their output after the success of The Little Mermaid.

Quality is gonna go down the drain fast.

[Kyle]

My problem is not per se with the sequels, but more with the fact that they're making way too many movies. We all know what happened when Disney went trigger happy and increased their output after the success of The Little Mermaid.

Quality is gonna go down the drain fast.

Its been about a movie per year for quite some time. Is that changing any time soon? Doesn't seem like it to me.

If Pixar wants to do sequels I think it would be a good idea to plan out a trilogy using a new IP. All of their sequel's (and prequel) so far came about after their predecessors were released. But what if they planned for sequels from the get go? I'm talking about Pixar's version of Star Wars, or Lord of the Rings, etc. Telling a story too big to fit into one movie. It could even be an adaptation of some book series. It would allow them to continue doing sequels without anyone claiming their milking something.

[PatrickvD]

My problem is not per se with the sequels, but more with the fact that they're making way too many movies. We all know what happened when Disney went trigger happy and increased their output after the success of The Little Mermaid.

Quality is gonna go down the drain fast.

Its been about a movie per year for quite some time. Is that changing any time soon? Doesn't seem like it to me.

They have two movies planned in 2015 and in 2017 and one for the other years.. I'm guessing you weren't aware?

[Sotiris]

My problem is not per se with the sequels, but more with the fact that they're making way too many movies. We all know what happened when Disney went trigger happy and increased their output after the success of The Little Mermaid.

I don't think you can blame the loss in quality to the increase of output in Disney's case. They only released two films in a single year twice. In 2000 with Fantasia and The Emperor's New Groove (I'm not including Dinosaur because it was produced by Secret Lab which then was a separate division) and in 2002 with Lilo & Stitch and Treasure Planet.

I'm sure Pixar Canada will get to work on a large portion of the work and even fully produce films at some point in the future similar to how Disney Florida functioned.

I don't like the fact that Pixar will be releasing two films every other year mainly because it forces WDAS not to have a film out the years Pixar releases two.

It could even be an adaptation of some book series.

Doesn't Pixar have a rule against adapting pre-existing material? I believe they've gone on record saying they only do original stories that are developed internally.

[Lnds500]

Doesn't Pixar have a rule against adapting pre-existing material? I believe they've gone on record saying they only do original stories that are developed internally.

Yes, they also had some rules about sequels though

[Kyle]

Its a rule that they haven't challenged yet but I'm sure they're answer if asked would be something akin to "if the right story came along". I doubt its anything written in stone, just not idea that has interested them thus far. I only bring it up because Its easier to see the bigger picture than if they had to start from scratch. They wouldn't adapt a comic book or anything, but I could see them picking some obscure book to try something they've never done before.

[Mickeyfan1990]

Contrary to the topic of this thread, this article indicates that Pixar is planning on slowing down on the sequels.

http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/pixar-sl ... quels.html

“For artistic reasons … it’s really important that we do an original film a year. Every once in a while, we get a film where we want or people want to see something continuing in that world — which is the rationale behind the sequel. They want those characters, which means we were successful with them. But if you keep doing that, then you aren’t doing original films.”

This is very promising. Atta boy Pixar. ^_^

[Maria_Potter]

I seriously don't know whether I should laugh or cry. I'm so mad at Pixar these days, and I'm even madder at myself for praising Pixar a few years ago for their flawless films and non-sequel policy. I just can't stand to watch Pixar doing what they were accusing Disney of back in Pixar's glory days: making easy, non-creative films, just in order to have a certain guaranteed profit. The only difference from Disney's sequels is the (invested and earned) money.

[thelittleursula]

My problem is not per se with the sequels, but more with the fact that they're making way too many movies. We all know what happened when Disney went trigger happy and increased their output after the success of The Little Mermaid.

Quality is gonna go down the drain fast.

Are you saying that movies after the Lion King sucked ? Like Hunchback and Hercules ?

*taps feet angrily *

[TheValentineBros]

Are you saying that movies after the Lion King sucked ? Like Hunchback and Hercules ?

*taps feet angrily *

You do know, that you can't get angry over a person saying Hercules sucked. You gotta respect someone's opinion.

[Sotiris]

Lasseter talks about the criticisms regarding Pixar doing more sequels.

Pixar has also come under critical fire for the number of sequels on its release schedule. Since 2010 it has updated Toy Story, Cars and Monsters, Inc. and in the next few years will release sequels to Finding Nemo and The Incredibles. It has prompted fears that the studio’s creative powers may be fading amid an increasing reliance on franchises across the film industry.

Mr Lasseter is himself critical of the trend, but insists Disney’s approach is different. “I have nothing against sequels if they’re done right,” he says. “Most other studios, they make sequels just to print money. We went for a long time at Pixar not making sequels because contractually we could not make a sequel. We did a five-picture deal with Disney when we were a separate company and those five pictures had to be original. You put your soul in these films and you love the characters and the world that they come from. We were prevented from telling any more stories with these characters in these worlds.

And it’s not about printing money. It’s not about that. It’s about the love as a creator of these characters and there being so much more you can tell in their worlds. So when we got the opportunity we set out to start making an occasional sequel for some of our favorite films. It’s our choice as creators. You see studios that already have a release date for a number three and a number four when they haven’t even finished number two. That’s not the way we do it.”

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... in-it.html

[Warm Regards]

^ Yes, because Cars 2 was totally made to continue the story that begged to be continued with the characters we all oh so adored.

And not some superficial reason like, pfft, the fact that Cars makes $1 billion dollars in merchandise. That's just silly!

(Forgive my sarcasm, I am a bit irritable this morning.)

[disneyprincess11]

^ Yes, because Cars 2 was totally made to continue the story that begged to be continued with the characters we all oh so adored.

And not some superficial reason like, pfft, the fact that Cars makes $1 billion dollars in merchandise. That's just silly!

(Forgive my sarcasm, I am a bit irritable this morning.)

No, you're totally right. That is a hyprocritical statement.

[estefan]

I think that's partly the reason, but it's also worth remembering that John Lasseter is probably a bigger Cars nut than anybody else on the planet. It's no secret that he's obsessed with automobiles and that extends to the Cars franchise. It's probably even more personal to him than Toy Story was.

[Sotiris]

I think that's partly the reason, but it's also worth remembering that John Lasseter is probably a bigger Cars nut than anybody else on the planet. It's no secret that he's obsessed with automobiles and that extends to the Cars franchise. It's probably even more personal to him than Toy Story was.

I agree. I would also add that he has such an ego that he'll never acknowledge the Cars movies suffer from real storytelling issues and it's not just that the critics have a vendetta against the franchise.

[Avaitor]

Yeah, the Cars movies are Lasseter's babies, regardless of how anyone else feels about them. If the movies and characters are able to bring in billions of dollars to the studio, that's just gravy.

[Disney's Divinity]

To be fair, I don't think any of their sequels have felt like they were made just to grab quick money, except possibly Monsters University. I'm sure Disney has less than pure motives in encouraging them to make sequels, but so far it doesn't seem to me as if Pixar/Lasseter has made a sequel unless they/he wanted to (either because of a spark of inspiration, or just an unexplainable love of the film like with Cars), imo. Finding Dory and The Incredibles 2 also don't come across like money-grabs, and we know Cars 3 is not, because Lasseter's personal obsession with that franchise is already been established.

I'm glad that Pixar isn't considered perfect anymore by the general public (just because, imo, they never were to begin with), but I don't really think their sequels have been as bad as, say, when Dreamworks plans out 3 more sequels to a successful film (even if the sequels occasionally turn out to be good in spite of it, like Shrek 2 or KFP 2), or how the The Lego Movie 2 was put into development as soon as the first film took off, or the existence of the Disney cheapquels... Strange, I almost feel like I'm defending Pixar... It might just be that I don't automatically hate the idea of sequels, but it's all in the execution, just like with original films.