Toy Story 3

Post by **PatrickvD** » March 14th, 2005, 9:20 am

Mickey A wrote:It is ironic that Raymond has directed both Disney's best dtv sequel and its worst, in many people's opinion. However, I think Hunchback II wouldn't be as hated as it is, if the film featured better animation. The animation in that movie may be the worst Disney animation I have ever seen. Seriously, some parts of it actually hurt my eyes.

me too... That is by far the worst movie I have ever seen... I'm a huge fan of the original though

Post by **Christian** » March 14th, 2005, 12:37 pm

I think he could probably do it. You can't blame everything about a movie on the director. Sometimes they just do the best they can with what they are given.

Post by **Josh** » March 14th, 2005, 12:54 pm

Personally, I am not upset about Raymond getting the job, after seeing Lion King 1 1/2. Like Christian pointed out, a director has to work with what he or she is given. Concerning Hunchback II, I know Raymond didn't say, "All right, folks, let's make the cheapest-looking Disney film ever!" Plus, as for Hunchback II's story, we don't know how much time Raymond was given to sort out any problems that may has came up with it. For all we know, Hunchback II's original screenplay may have tremendously awful, but Raymond molded it into something better.

Some people are complaing that a more "established" director like Mark Dindal or Chris Sanders didn't get the project. However, it has been said that several of Disney's top animation directors turned the job down. Can you blame them? Maybe if there had not been such a negative buzz already going about a sequel that no one even knows the story to, one of these directors would have taken the project. I mean, people are already saying that Toy Story 3 stinks, but they have no clue what it is even about. I feel sorry for anyone who has to work on the sequel, because, from what I can tell by most of the online community, folks are not even going to give Toy Story 3 a chance.

And you know what that says to Disney? Think about it: if they can put out a quick, cheap sequel or a thought-out, expensive sequel, but get the same results when it comes to the amount the film makes, which do you think Disney is going to do the most?

Post by **Kinoo** » March 14th, 2005, 1:04 pm

Why the "big" directors turned the project down? Easy answer: the project is non respectful of the artists work at the very source of it! Come on Disney is STEALING John Lasseter and Pixar crew's characters and they expect that Hollywood will acclaim them?

this project better die down...

Post by **splinewrangler** » March 14th, 2005, 1:11 pm

I think some of you may be seeing things differently than it really happened. Brad is honestly really liked by the executives at Disney. And because of that, Brad was offered the job a long time ago. Maybe as early as August.

At the time, Brad was directing a live action/CG movie for Warner Brothers. The movie got canned because of its excessive CG costs.

Disney tried to lure him away from Warner Brothers, Brad didn't want to go. He had such bad experiences with Lion King 1.5. He declined, over and over again. They kept coming back to him. Then they started pursuing other directors. It wasn't like everyone turned the project down THEN they went to Brad. It was most likely the other way around.

Brad was in negotiations for months. Finally he agreed recently. Disney is paying Brad an ENORMOUS amount of money to do this film. They really wanted him. I have never heard of a director getting the cash he is getting for this project. it is simply crazy money.

Brad had to fight hard against Disney to get things even as good as they were. Unless you were on the project or close to it, you simply cannot understand the unreasonable demands and suggestions made by executives. As much as Brad hated dealing with that, he did excel at getting the execs to compromise.

And don't feel sorry for people working on TS3. There are some top notch people working on it, and Disney is not going to take the risk of hiring slackers on a film that they know will be positioned against Pixar. This also will work negatively because the execs will put their thumbprint on this project even more than usual.

Post by **Christian** » March 14th, 2005, 2:09 pm

A lot of people seem determined to hate TS3 no matter what.

Post by **Josh** » March 14th, 2005, 2:42 pm

That's what I meant when I said I feel sorry for the people working on Toy Story 3.

As for what you wrote, splinewrangler, is that is true, then it is a fascinating story. When I wrote my above message, I was just going by what I read elsewhere, which, I'll admit, could have been false, though the news source seemed reliable.

Unless you were on the project or close to it, you simply cannot understand the unreasonable demands and suggestions made by executives.

Could you tell us some of those demands? I'm just curious.

Post by **Kinoo** » March 14th, 2005, 3:35 pm

A lot of people seem determined to hate TS3 no matter what.

yes a lot of people ARE determined to hate TS3 made by Disney stealing characters from PIXAR, just to quote a few name of those people:
John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, Brad Bird, Pete Docter ...

Post by **Christian** » March 14th, 2005, 3:44 pm

There's no stealing going on. Disney owns the right to the Toy Story characters and the Pixar people understood that from the outset.

Post by **Ben** » March 14th, 2005, 4:39 pm

Brad Bird was also not anything to do with the Toy Story franchise.

If one looks into this properly, you'll notice that the first Toy Story wil was produced ENTIRELY by Disney. It was marketed as "Disney's Toy Story" and had all its pre-production done at Feature Animation.

Check the copyright on the DVDs: you'll see that Toy Story is (c) Disney, but that Toy Story 2, when all co-pros were jointly produced, is (c)Disney-Pixar.

There was even some merhcnadise and stuff that explicitly read "Toy Story Characters (c) Disney. Toy Story 2 Characters (c) Disney and Pixar".

Disney is not stealing the rights. They own them. They are taking away the rights for the original crew to return, but we'll have to see what happens now that Iger has been named Disney CEO.

Strange that both announcements (one that could have pleased Jobs, one that will continue to stir him up) were made at the same time...

Post by **Kinoo** » March 14th, 2005, 4:51 pm

i didn't mean STEALING litteraly, i KNOW that Disney can do everythjing they want with Pixar characters, even to make Boo grown up and have fun with Mickael bambi Jackson. What i meant is that they take away the characters created by the folks over PIXAR, the folks taht gave them life, that cared for them, NOW they see that big fat Mickey will make TWO cheapquels with the only goal to make money. Pretty depressing, i don't caution this!

Post by **Christian** » March 14th, 2005, 4:52 pm

But we don't know yet what the quality of it will be. You can pre-judge if you want to but it makes more sense to eveluate after it comes out.

Post by **splinewrangler** » March 15th, 2005, 1:23 am

Mickey A wrote:
Unless you were on the project or close to it, you simply cannot understand the unreasonable demands and suggestions made by executives.
Could you tell us some of those demands? I'm just curious.

All things you have probably heard before...Executives that know what makes a better story, a funnier line, a more impressive ending than the story artists and directors that have spent their lives as creatives.. Who cares that they have business degrees and not an ounce of creativity. It doesn't matter... I can't think of any examples right off the top of my head... The next time I talk with a friend who was pretty high on the totem pole at Disney DTV department, I will ask him. From previous discussions, I do recall him going on about how much of a directors time at Disney is spent dealing with executive/management changes and or suggestions and fighting to keep the story going in a serviceable direction... The director on an animated film rarely has the final say, and in some places (like disney) it becomes less directing and more of just damage control.

Post by **Christian** » March 15th, 2005, 1:43 am

and in some places (like disney) it becomes less directing and more of just damage control.

What a sorry state of affairs.

Post by **askmike1** » March 15th, 2005, 6:43 pm

Mickey A wrote:from what I can tell by most of the online community, folks are not even going to give Toy Story 3 a chance.

People will never give Disney a chance. I wish that would change, but most people are too stuborn to believe Disney can do something good.

Kinoo wrote: Why the "big" directors turned the project down? Easy answer: the project is non respectful of the artists work at the very source of it! Come on Disney is STEALING John Lasseter and Pixar crew's characters and they expect that Hollywood will acclaim them?

this project better die down...

How is this not respectful to the artists? You know whats not respectful to the artists...calling film CHEAPQUELS...but who would do that? Also, who are you to talk about respect when you don't respect Michael Eisner, the animators who work hard on all Disney films, and say stupid things like "Mickael bambi Jackson?"
Give Disney a chance. I think Disney will make a Toy Story that will be much better than even Toy Story 2.