Re: Say what you will of Cars 2, it's not this...

[Doctor Who?]

I have heard both Boll and bay talk about how much they love their movies,does that make them good or mean that they are not made to cash in in a line of action figures or video games?  Here is the thing Lasseter has complained about Disney selling out back when he first worked for them in the 80s and yet here he is doing the exact same thing,no one can complain when he is called on it.  he didn't make this movie to be creative,he made it to put another couple of million in his pocket from the toy sales.  he is just as much a sell out now as Disney was in the 80s.

[RoninFox]

I thought the first Cars was passable with some fun moments, interesting to watch just for the nostalgia quality of Pixar bringing back the classic look of very old living cars cartoon shorts I remember playing on the Disney Channel.  Got sick of it quickly because whenever my former roommate would babysit for family, the only thing that'd keep the kids attention was that movie playing on a loop.  I see this as a matter of a company I've grown used to making family friendly movies deciding to make a "kids" movie now and then.  I can't see the same company that in recent years made Wall-E, Up, and Toy Story 3 just flipping the switch to evil.  Also considering I think their third ever feature film was Toy Story 2, I don't think making a sequel now proves they're just now changing over to cranking out sequels for the cash.  Even if that is what this particular movie is, the critic's response might push them back on the right path.

I can't say what Cars 2 is or isn't, because after only kind of liking Cars I'm going to rush out and see it.  Eventually I'm sure I'll see it on DVD or Blu Ray, probably while visiting my brother and his kids or something.

Are they a business?  Uh, yeah.  Is money a motivating factor?  Yup.  Did Cars make them a shitload of money?  Obviously so.  Whether the critics are on board or not, making this movie was a smart business decision.  I'm not going to base my moviegoing decisions on whether there's a lot of toys on the shelves, I can always just not buy the toys.  There were toys all over the place for all three Spider-Man movies, and two of those were worth seeing.

And all this still has absolutely nothing to do with the non-Pixar Planes movie that we only have a trailer for.

[Doctor Who?]

See that is the point.  people want me to say that Cars 2 is an artistic movie,it's not.  if you admit that the main reason they made this movie is to sell toys then that makes it a toy ad.

[RoninFox]

See that is the point.  people want me to say that Cars 2 is an artistic movie,it's not.  if you admit that the main reason they made this movie is to sell toys then that makes it a toy ad.

I never said that you should consider Cars 2 to be artistic.

Not once.

I'm just saying you shouldn't discount everything they ever do until the end of time because of it.

[RoninFox]

Though I will also say that I thought Kung Fu Panda 2 looked like a lame cash grab at first, then ended up seeing it as part of a triple feature at a drive in, and enjoyed it.

[Doctor Who?]

Well my other problem is that every movie Pixar has in production is a sequel.  To me that just says that they have run out of ideas,so now they are just making cash ins and toy ads.  I think that either Disney is forcing them to make nothing but sequels to sell more toys or they need fresh blood in their writer's room stat.  Either way I don't have much interest in seeing a Pixar movie until things change.

[Relaxing Dragon]

Well my other problem is that every movie Pixar has in production is a sequel.  To me that just says that they have run out of ideas,so now they are just making cash ins and toy ads.  I think that either Disney is forcing them to make nothing but sequels to sell more toys or they need fresh blood in their writer's room stat.  Either way I don't have much interest in seeing a Pixar movie until things change.

Well, every movie except Brave (which I think is next year). And whatever it is they're cooking up for 2013. And by every other movie they have in production right now, I mean Monster's University, which is one.

[RoninFox]

Well my other problem is that every movie Pixar has in production is a sequel.  

To my knowledge, they have two planned movies for the next two years.  Monsters University, which is a sequel; and Brave, which isn't.  So you're 50% wrong there.

[Doctor Who?]

Mark my words Brave will be canceled in favor of Finding Nemo or A Bugs life 2,remember Newt.  It was in production and looking good and then they canceled it in favor of Cars 2.

[RoninFox]

I bow to your insider knowledge, and I hope your spy inside Disney is well paid.

(Newt was rumored to have been cancelled because it was found to be very similar to Rio, and Rio made it to theaters first.  Brave is what took Newt's release slot, not Cars 2.)

[D.B. Barnes]

(Newt was rumored to have been cancelled because it was found to be very similar to Rio, and Rio made it to theaters first.  Brave is what took Newt's release slot, not Cars 2.)

So, what's the wrong percentage up to now?

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

Mark my words Brave will be canceled in favor of Finding Nemo

Your words are liked.  

Do you understand how much money is involved with greenlighting a feature?  I talked to one of the artists for brave.  They are already working on a good deal of it.  They arent going to cancel it for any reason.  

if you admit that the main reason they made this movie is to sell toys then that makes it a toy ad

He never said it was the MAIN reason they made the movie and you certainly havent shown that the MAIN reason to make the movie was to sell toys.  They sold a bunch of toys and im sure they intended to however thats a FAR FAR FAR removed concept from they only made this as an excuse to sell toys.  All i know from work is a tad bit specific so pardon the odd analogy.  Its like trying to say the MQ-1 predator drone whole purpose is to drop bombs on the enemy.  Its something everyone knows it does.   But it isnt even its main purpose.  

 Besides you dont sink 120,000,000 dollars into a movie on the off chance kids will like it and buy plastic car toys.  Further even if they DID (which is ludicris) make the movie SOLELY for the purpose of selling toys, why is this a bad thing?  It was a good movie with some awesome route 66 nostaligia.   It was a clean kids movie that parents enjoyed.  Why not be happy kids have toys they like.  Where is the evil?  


Most the time you seem like quite an affable guy but you do seem a tad bit prone to conspiracy theories.  

[doggans]

people want me to say that Cars 2 is an artistic movie,it's not.

I didn't say that it's artistic; I just said that it's Lasseter's personal project.

One of my personal projects in college was a really goofy spoof of fantasy movies. It was a movie I was passionate about making, but I wouldn't ever claim it was art. Hell, I wouldn't claim it was *good*. But I might be offended if someone accused me of making it for any reason other than it being a project I wanted to make.

Tangled was the same damn movie Disney's made a trillion times. All they do is this one princess story with a small animal friend that reacts to stuff. It looked beautiful, but it wasn't creative by any stretch.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I thought Tangled brought a lot of new things to the table--specifically, the relationship between princess and evil stepmother, a far more nuanced villain relationship than most kids/fairy tale movies give us.

Plus, it had friend-of-RiffTrax Paul F. Tompkins as a drunk cupid, which I never realized was exactly what I wanted from an animated film.

[Compound]

Mark my words Brave will be canceled in favor of Finding Nemo or A Bugs life 2

[Nunyerbiz]

Cars 2, I firmly believe, was made to sell toys and capitalize on the success of the first. Pixar messed up badly, either by caving to Disney's demands (if they made them), giving into greed, or by simply making a very poor decision to create a needless sequel with an unimaginative premise.

THEN DON'T FUCKING SEE IT!!! THE MOVIE IS CLEARLY AIMED AT SIX YEAR OLDS .... FUCK!!!!!!! HOW MUCH GLUE WERE YOU SNIFFING DURING THE ENDLESS COMMERICIALS TO THINK THIS WAS FOR YOU?!?! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Ok, just got back from Cars 2... It's shit for any adult who holds Pixar as some fluffy comfy security blanket substitute for their own childhoods... For actual kids, Cars 2 works quite well. Mater does and says stupid shit, cool adventure and action stuff ensue, kids laugh, it all works in the end.