DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I would hazard a guess that most people know that Walt Disney had nothing to do with the creation of Pixar, especially as he died nearly thirty years before Pixar released their first film. Have you actually ever heard someone say that? And yes, they are two different companies who have had a long and successful partnership that is going to continue.
I didn't hear anyone say that exactly, but it's implied when people think Pixar and Disney are the same thing, because if they are the same thing, that would mean people do think they were founded by the same person, you see.
DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I don't see it like that, maybe others do. The success of Pixar's films raised the game in the animation industry and as a result, Disney have had to raise their game. Personally, I don't see that as a bad thing.
Since Pixar came onto the scene, has Disney really done better? Tangled didn't get nominated for Best Animated Feature, but Pixar's movie did. Couple this with the fact that Pixar was definately the reason other studios, including Disney, changed to CGI and is probably the reason Disney has tried to be un-Disney to compete with the non-Disney but more successful films.
Dr Frankenollie wrote:Disney Duster wrote:And I think it's very obvious Walt Disney would never buy another movie studio to help him, I see it is obvious that he would rather he makes his own Disney movies and he succeed on his own movies' merits.
Except...he did buy another movie studio to help him in the late 1940's: Denham Film Studios in Britain, which helped him produce Treasure Island and the Story of Robin Hood and his Merrie Men (released in 1950 and 1952, respectively).
NO HE DIDN'T, that's wrong. I looked up info on that studio you said Walt bought, and what he did was not the same thing today's heads at Disney did with Pixar at all!!! He bought their studio to make his own films there, to make his own Disney ideas come to life using it as a tool. That is not Pixar, which is Pixar people coming up with their own Pixar ideas and Disney taking their money and depending on their success instead of their own from actual Disney movies. Walt Disney did not buy all of Denham's films and sell them as his own like today's Disney heads are doing with Pixar, Walt was basically just using their lot to shoot his own Disney, not Denham, Disney films.
Dr Frankenollie wrote:Once again, Disney Duster, I cannot fathom what goes through your mind sometimes; you dislike Pixar simply because people think it's Disney?! Yes, it's different, but it's nevertheless a very similar entity to Disney; and besides, although this will anger and upset you, Pixar has made plenty of movies much better than the majority of DACs.
In fact, I would say that only the first five DACs and the four big Renaissance movies are better than Pixar's best, whilst the likes of everything from Cinderella to the Hunchback of Notre Dame are inferior to things like Toy Story, Up and Wall-E. Pixar's movies are original, inventive and all maintain a perfect balance of emotion and humour (even Cars, but I haven't seen Cars 2 yet). Ever since 1995, Pixar has been beating Disney at its own game and has yet to stop doing so.
I don't dislike Pixar because people think it's Disney, that is one reason but actually I dislike Pixar because I see that their only okay and so many people wrongly think they're the best, better than Disney.
I actually cannot believe that you said most of Disney's films are inferior to Pixar's. That goes against you being a member here or even having your user name. Frank and Ollie would definately be appalled and ashamed to hear that you said that. You could write any explanation of why you think they wouldn't because it's their animation that's so good or they didn't think the other films were the best but that doesn't mean they wouldn't still be absolutely terribly hurt and think you're wrong for what you said because I think we both know it is most, most likely that they really would.
Anyway, the Pixar films just aren't all that great. Their all re-treads of like the same basic buddy-comedy-get-the-thing structure, Bugs Life, Monsters Inc., and Cars were so forgettable and hardly ever mentioned until the recent sequel discussions and Wall-E had a really poor second half while Ratatouille made no sense with it's presenting the critic something that's supposed to be original but instead of meeting that challenge it really fed the critic and us something that was old and just reminded the critic of something he ate before. And Toy Story 3 had that too long drawn out fire scene unecessarily until they were somehow out of the blue saved by other characters, a big ol tease, not to mention we still have the problem of how the toys may forget about Andy, passed from owner to owner, do toys even die, it's just full of problems that the ending created instead of solved. And Up was one of the most lackluster all-over-the place things I've ever seen with the guy meeting his childhood hero not stiring up any big feelings like it should have.
And none of these Pixar movies have the Disney magic found in just about every single Disney film. None of them have touched that unique power only found in Disney that feels so wonderful in a way Pixar couldn't make because they're Pixar not Disney. Disney is original and inventive, just applied to classic stories, which means they have a balance themselves of the idea of timeless classics and new creativity, something Pixar doesn't have. And a balance of humor and emotion or being original is not all there is to films, something Pixar people won't understand. The wonderful magical feelings found in Disney films can't be found in other films and if other people, including you, can't feel them, then all it is is a sad shame that shouldn't be. But I say that almost all of Disney's films are far superior to Pixar's films, even if not on some kind of technical levels that for some reason are the only things you can see I guess. A film is much more than a technical crowd pleasing thing.
I only rejoiced at Pixar's Cars 2 fail because I just want Pixar to stop doing what you said, "beating Disney at their own game", because while I don't think they truly are beating Disney in the area of films, Pixar is beating Disney at success among audiences and critics, Pixar is beating Disney at getting people to like them.
Wonderlicious, your trying to use my religion in this won't work on me. "Be as you would be done by" is what I follow, as if somewhere Pixar was talking about how they are joyful that my movie didn't hit it well with the critics...I would accept that! I genuinely felt joy over Pixar now being equal to the other studios, I am joyful they are no longer "beating Disney at their own game" as Dr Frankenollie said. I felt genuine joy and I am not hurting anyone with it, in fact you're supposed to let your feelings out.
And I do not want the company to outright fail and die like you completely exaggerated! I simply want them to stop beating Disney, like every real Disney fan really probably wants even if they don't admit it.
And by the way
Wondy, I don't think Walt Disney would like you referencing Cinderella with the "C word" joke making it a double entendre for one of the most foul words in all of curse words.
The_Iceflash, the only reason that you accept Pixar as part of Disney is because the heads of Disney bought Pixar and put their films and characters next to theirs and in the parks. You are basically just following what the current heads of Disney are trying to make happen because they want Pixar's success, even though the heads at Disney said they were going to ignore what the real person who made Disney, Walt Disney, wanted for the Disney company. For shame, man. But Disney and Pixar still have seperate names and identities and are not one another.
In case you meant Pixar, Pixar have never stolen anyone's success, they achieved their own success through producing films of a high quality that appealed to millions and millions of people all over the world. As far as I can tell, Pixar have never played up their association with Disney to try and promote their films so I fail to see how they "stole" success.
Michael Cane was awesome (as always) and I had no issues with Mater being the main focus. The only thing that felt off to me was that the entire premise did not fit the tone of the original film. Even with the same main characters, it didn't seem connected enough to feel canon. We got spies this time around, but there might as well have been aliens or superheroes. Instead of an honest-feeling continuation of the original, it simply felt like Pixar sold out.
