Up needs a sequel.
Lets call it Down.
Lets call it Down.
Pixar is making The Incredibles 2 and Cars 3
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
I'd say Cars was my least favourite Pixar film, if it wasn't for Cars 2.
Looking forward to the Incredibles sequel. That movie was tailor-made for a continuing franchise and is actually worth developing the universe further.
Have zero interest in Cars, Cars 2, Cars 3, Planes, Planes 2, Boats 3, Trains 4, Rockets 5, Mobility Scooters 6, Bicycles 7... Terrible from the outset and only getting worse with each sequel and spinoff. Kid's love it, but they love eating dirt too, so what do they know?
Have zero interest in Cars, Cars 2, Cars 3, Planes, Planes 2, Boats 3, Trains 4, Rockets 5, Mobility Scooters 6, Bicycles 7... Terrible from the outset and only getting worse with each sequel and spinoff. Kid's love it, but they love eating dirt too, so what do they know?
I'd actually like to see what they could do with Trains, if only for the fact that vehicles which can't leave their tracks are an interesting limit on the story possibilities.
There is a show on Disney Jr called Chuggington, if you want to check out what Trains would be like.
This. So this. The kind of thing that just outright announces "we're greedy, you have no willpower and your kids are dumb as rocks, let's do this."
Don't forget Segways, followed by Segways 2: The Segwel!
As opposed to Bolt, Frozen, A Bugs Life, etc, which Disney only made for artistic intent.
Yeah I don't get this. Disney makes movies to make money, they have been doing that with cartoons for 75 ears. But let's act like it's a new thing!
Add to the fact, that it's pretty much Thomas the Tank Engine, oddly enough.
I am looking forward to the inevitable Starships spinoff, though
About a not so brave starship venturing out into the unknown; rather cocky and trigger-happy and starting a war with a race known as the Kirgons in the process.
Last edited:
The issue is not with sequels or spinoffs in and of themselves. We're in a thread talking about us being excited for a sequel to The Incredibles, so obviously that's not it. The problem is lazy, rushed, derivative, poorly written, and excessive (often straight-to-DVD) sequels and spinoffs where making a buck on DVD sales and merchandizing seemed to be more important than making a good movie.
The examples like Bolt (though I haven't seen that one), Frozen, and A Bug's Life don't fit that description, nor does The Incredibles 2 given the length of time Brad Bird has waited to make sure he had the right story before proceeding. I'm sure Disney would have wanted to make a couple sequels, and direct-to-DVD spin-offs for Fro-Zone and the baby by now.
And who cares if it's something Disney has done for decades? Does that mean you're not allowed to say something about it now? Is there a statute of limitations on criticizing lame sequels and spin-offs?
I don't have a problem with them wanting to make hundreds of millions of dollars on ticket/DVD/Blu-ray sales and merchandizing. I get that that's their motivation as a corporation. But it shouldn't come at the expense of the quality of the film.
Besides all that, my objection to Cars is just that I didn't like it, and the sequels and spin-offs were worse.
I cited Bolt, A Bug's Life, and Frozen as they are three Disney animated films (though not all Pixar) from which there have been no sequels. The point being - every movie Disney makes is a greedy money-grab. That's their business.
I submit there's a difference between Cinderella 2 (and 3), Pocahontas 2, Bambi 2, and Cars 2. Hell, if you want to talk only DTV sequels Planes itself was supposed to be DTV until they thought it was of the quality to go theatrical.
Quality is of course subjective and likely not something Disney puts above everything else.
Of those listed, only A Bug's Life was Pixar. In fact, it isn't quite correct to call it a "Disney animated film" at all, since at the time it was made, Pixar was not yet a division of Disney, but a separate company that co-produced the film with Disney.
It was distributed by Disney. It might not be quite correct by your standard but it works for me.
I don't think Bug's Life was that popular enough to get a sequel. However if you don't think there will be a Frozen 2 within the next few years you are completely out of your mind.
But once again, Cars is a toy franchise, it's the only reason new movies and spinoffs are made. If you don't like that then ignore the movie, not that hard to do. Every company ever has done this. All of the TMNT shows and movies have been based one selling toys first and story second.
I haven't met a child yet that hasn't like Cars.
It's possible, as Locutus points out, to make money (and sell toys, in this case) and make good entertainment at the same time. Bolt is actually a pretty good example of that, as I'm told is Frozen (though I haven't seen it). The Cars / Planes / et-ceteras franchise, not so much.
bigdaddy said:
I haven't met a child yet that hasn't liked Toy Story or Up or The Incredibles or Wall-E or Ratatouille. The difference is I've met many people outside the toy marketing demographic who also like those movies, because they're actually good movies.
I'm not working in brand management for Pixar or anything, so as you say it's no particular skin off my nose, I just steer clear of the crap content. But if I were? I'd be advising them that their ability to hit that sweet spot -- producing profitable children's entertainment that's also not crap and appeals to adults -- is at the heart of their brand, and the open cynicism of the Cars / Planes / et-ceteras franchise is doing damage to that.
I'm perturbed by this news more than I am excited, for the very reason that I fear Pixar is losing their innovative spirit. 
The thing about them as a studio is that they were all about creating new worlds with every movie -- one of the few studios really willing to throw it out there and see what happens -- with Toy Story being pretty much the only movie of theirs for a very long time that got sequels (justified pretty much by it being Pixar's tent-pole franchise). But with Cars 2, and Monsters U, and now THIS news, I fear they're really starting to lose their ability to come up with new things. Like everybody else in the movie-sphere, the "safe" option of doing sequels seems to be displacing everything that sort of made Pixar so unique.
The thing about them as a studio is that they were all about creating new worlds with every movie -- one of the few studios really willing to throw it out there and see what happens -- with Toy Story being pretty much the only movie of theirs for a very long time that got sequels (justified pretty much by it being Pixar's tent-pole franchise). But with Cars 2, and Monsters U, and now THIS news, I fear they're really starting to lose their ability to come up with new things. Like everybody else in the movie-sphere, the "safe" option of doing sequels seems to be displacing everything that sort of made Pixar so unique.
I don't know about that. We know of six upcoming feature-length Pixar projects, and three are sequels (Finding Dory, Incredibles 2, Cars 2) and the rest are original (Inside Out, The Good Dinosaur, and a project involving the Mexican Day of the Dead). So it's 50-50 at this point.
Pixar has announced three original movies that they're working on, in conjunction with three sequels. That's hardly "displacing" original movles. (Especially if Pixar continues with their plans to continue releasing an original movie every year, with sequels being released in addition to instead of replacing the originals.)
After they kept having so many hits, wanting to do a sequel to at least one of them was inevitable. If Pixar comes up with a good idea to justify a sequel, then I'm fine with letting them try. It worked out well for Toy Story twice, and Monsters U at least was a worthwhile premise, even if it didn't quite reach their usual bar.
As for Cars... well, I look at those movies as like Michael Caine's role in Jaws 4: terrible movies that bring in lots of money to pay the bills.