"With its sophisticated underwater tale Finding Nemo, Pixar has eclipsed the master."
"In fact, [Pixar's] teaching Disney new tricks. The only big crowd pleasers Disney has had lately have been generated for it by Pixar, with Disney doing co-financing and distribution."
"It's latest picture, the fish story Finding Nemo, has earned first release box-office grosses that eclipse those of animation's previous record holder, Disney's proud beast, the Lion King."
Were you one of those people who deep down, secretly hoped Nemo wouldn't outdo Simba?
What do you think is instore for Disney and Pixar with deal renegotiations in 2005? (I have the urge to say...Find out next week on the Bold and the Beautiful...)
Can't really be too upset with those quotes, since it can be argued that all three are right on. And no I'm not upset that Nemo eclipsed TLK because it's a part of the Disney family of films. It may not be an Animated Classic, but a classic it is nonetheless.
As for the Pixar/Disney negotiations, we've had some extensive discussions about it here the past couple of months. To paraphrase my thoughts, I think it will come down to the wire but a new contract will be signed between Pixar and Disney.
When i first saw posters and ads for Finding Nemo.... it looked really stupid to me.... the plot sounded drab..... the Pixar animation didn't look very exciting (nothing that hasn't been done before).... and so i was in no particular rush to see it! even after ppl started talking about how good it was.... i still wasnt racing to the theaters.
I thought..... what could possibly be so interesting about fish??
well.... after i saw it that time.... i saw it again in the theater a week and a half later. so you can guess the answer to my previous question...
55 days 'till Jack is back
They do say, Mrs M, that verbal insults hurt more than physical pain. They are, of course, wrong, as you will soon discover when I stick this toasting fork into your head. - Blackadder the Third
I was surprised. I only guessed a $30 million dollar opening weekend,and $200 million throught its entire run. And it's pretty long for an animated movie(110 mins.). The movie had such great sound,I almost lost my hearing!
I didn't want Nemo to beat the Lion King. I think that all of Pixar's movies are utterly overrated. A Bug's Life is one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. Monsters Inc. is to childish. The other three are good movies but nothing shee-shocking. Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and the Little Mermaid beat Pixar any day. The only Disney movie I've ever been disappointed with is Treasure Planet. Remember without disney there would never be a Pixar. Disney's the king in animation and will always be.
I don't think Pixar is overrated at all - their 5 films in the past 8 years have been better than every single animated feature Disney has put out, and they've certainly put out some good ones.
That said, I would have liked to see Lion King remain the animated box office champ, but the timing for Nemo was perfect. With a summer of "two weeks and it's history" style big budget pictures, the only ones with real holding power were Nemo and Pirates...and Nemo had little in competition in the family film department.
I think Pixar's writing is really leaps and bounds ahead of Disney most of the time, and that is why their movies are succeeding, more so than the technology behind it.
Luke wrote:
I think Pixar's writing is really leaps and bounds ahead of Disney most of the time, and that is why their movies are succeeding, more so than the technology behind it.
True dat.
I've been preaching since 06/17/03 that it's the story that carries animated/CGI films. It can be as flashy as anything, but if there's no substance it's gonna fall flat. Every single one of Pixar's films have had truly engaging storylines and characters ... and it doesn't hurt that they are amazing to look at, too.
Last edited by indianajdp on Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
No, I don't mind comments like that because I think it's the absolute truth. As wonderful as Disney's output has been -- especially the last few pictures -- Pixar has quickly established itself as THE leader in animation. I believe that with the oncomming flood of CGI material from every studio imaginable and more, there's bound to be a few disappointments and weak points -- but Pixar movies will always, always be brilliant. Their storytelling and characters are spot-on, and when it comes down to it, that's what's most important in any film. It doesn't hurt that Pixar's films are always technologically groundbreaking and goregus eye candy, either. Nor does it hurt that the musical scores are all wonderful and very effective even with Pixar's reluctance to use a lot of musical numbers in their films, outside of the Toy Story movies.
I was happy that, once again, animated movies were no longer being consider as "just kids stuff," but I hated that it was more reason for people to consider 2-D animation as old news.
[quote="IggieKuzco"]When i first saw posters and ads for Finding Nemo.... it looked really stupid to me.... the plot sounded drab..... the Pixar animation didn't look very exciting (nothing that hasn't been done before)...quote]
What were you smokin'? Animation had been done before? Where have you seen animation like that before and if you say the Windows XP Plus Screensaver I'm going to go nuts. The animation is nothing like anyone has ever done before. It's beautiful and breathtaking. That's half the reason it has done so well.
To all who come to this happy place, Welcome...Disneyland is your land...
I'd have to agree with most of the comment here.
I think Pixar have done an excellent job of balancing out the "wow factor" of new technology and animation techniques with solid storylines and soundtracks in each case. It always helps when you have voice talent that is talented too.
I wouldn't go so far as to say they have "eclipsed the master", as they are still at least 30-something films short of Disney's resume. I would say that they have equalled the master in terms of popularity for their time (Disney did feature length animation first, Pixar did feature length 3D first), but I guess only time will tell how strong the Pixar name will be.
This isn't exactly related here, but I often wonder this: would everyone here be so kind about Pixar's success if it was not attached to Disney?
I have seen some pretty harsh comments about Dreamworks and Fox here (who I think have done some OK work, if not Disney/Pixar standard). I often wonder if that attack is on the quality of the animation , or the studio it comes from.
Disney are subject to a similar stigma from many. "Oh another Disney film - songs and crap, pfft...".
Just curious is all...
Loomis wrote:
This isn't exactly related here, but I often wonder this: would everyone here be so kind about Pixar's success if it was not attached to Disney?
Sure.
If an animated film rocks, I'm gonna say so regardless of the Studio involved. Personallly, I loved Shrek and Ice Age and have said as much on this site on occassion. Likewise, if an animated film is really lacking I'll call it to task...even if it is a Disney/Pixar film.
