Monsters University

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 4879
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: You're always better off with a really good lie

Monsters Inc. 2?

Post by Daniel » June 9th, 2009, 9:24 pm

Yeah, we've all heard the rumors, but this new article gives a little more hope.

Personally I do hope the sequel becomes a reality. I really love the original. The ending wraps up so perfectly, but at the same time leaves you wanting more. One things for sure, it's a heck of lot more deserving of a sequel then say, Cars...

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1518
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Post by droosan » June 9th, 2009, 10:22 pm

Cars is 'deserving' of a sequel because new Cars merchandise is still being made -- and is still selling well -- over three years after its release.

New Cars movie = new characters and situations for even more Cars toys and merch.

/don't gripe; it's good to have an 'easy money-maker' once in awhile, so that the 'riskier' projects can get made ..

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3111
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » June 9th, 2009, 11:23 pm

droosan wrote:Cars is 'deserving' of a sequel because new Cars merchandise is still being made -- and is still selling well -- over three years after its release.

New Cars movie = new characters and situations for even more Cars toys and merch..
The Cars sequel did seem like Iger was "So there!"'ing the earlier doomsaying of hysterical knee-jerk media columnists calling the movie a "flop" for not being Nemo--
One sequel or a few spinoff toons, maybe, but Iger seems to be out to prove something.

As for Monsters 2, wasn't that the other Circle 7 project Eisner was threatening Pixar with, that Pixar had to later "reclaim" in-house as they did with TS3?
Think there was also a Bug's Life sequel being mentioned at the time, but can't recall.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 442
Joined: November 22nd, 2006
Location: Boston, MA

Post by Rodney » June 9th, 2009, 11:47 pm

I don't mind a Monsters, Inc. sequel as long as the original players all return. I am curious to see what they will do with it. I'm sure there is potential for greatness here.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: January 23rd, 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere

Post by eddievalient » June 10th, 2009, 12:48 am

Pixar hasn't failed yet, so I'm sure it'll be good, but personally I'd much rather see an Incredibles sequel.
The Official Lugofilm Ltd Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/bartsimpson83

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 676
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » June 10th, 2009, 6:39 pm

Well I'm one person who isn't hanging out for this sequel. I found the first one to be very ho-hum. I remember checking my watch a couple of times during my first experience. I personally think the only Pixar film that ever screamed SEQUEL!!!! was The Incredibles and that's cause it has endless stories that could be told. All you need is a villain to fight. I suppose if they do do a sequel to Monsters I'll be content with it as long as it doesn't involve a grown up Boo and her children.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3845
Joined: May 31st, 2005
Location: Maryland

Monsters Inc. 2 / Brave discussion

Post by Meg » April 23rd, 2010, 11:18 am

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2730&p=l.htm

I'm curious as to how everyone feels about the majority of Pixar's releases within the next few years being sequels, as well as the name change of The Bear And The Bow to Brave. Personally I'm getting really upset about the whole sequel business, and kind of losing faith that Pixar doesn't just make these movies for the money. Bear's title change also seems like another cheap attempt to try and appeal to the boys, just like Rupunzel's name change to Tangled.

While I'm really looking forward to Brave and John Carter of Mars, I don't have very much interest at all in Cars 2 and I don't think Monsters Inc. needed any kind of sequel. Heck I think I would have even rather seen an original movie being released this year instead of Toy Story 3.

Thoughts?

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18422
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » April 23rd, 2010, 11:35 am

Weeeeelll...

1) Disney bought them, and wants to see a return on their investment.

2) Pixar, like any other company, needs to keep the hits coming so they don't lose their independence.

3) Pixar is expanding, with the move into live-action, and that's a big risk for them. They need to potentially cushion any blow and the best way to do this is with a sequel that they know carries brand recognition and will probably deliver big numbers.

4) Lasseter's reign at Disney hasn't yet delivered results. Sure there is the goodwill that Disney is doing hand-drawn again - at least for now - but none of the films that have carried Lasseter's name as exec producer (Robinsons, Bolt, Princess) have exceeded or even met expectations (with Princess the big gamble that didn't pay back as much as it could/should have).

5) The Bear And The Bow's title change is exactly that, to appeal to wider audiences. At the end of the day, Pixar has been bought by a bigger company that needs to see an improved bottom line and, despite whatever terms Pixar had put in place to keep going independent from top-level interference, they would have been based on goals and certain figures.

When you factor in that Pixar being bought by Disney was just as much about revitalizing Disney as it was about owning Pixar, you can see that the overall performance hasn't been the amazing "everything's a blockbuster" story that Disney paid for.

So Pixar, for creative means or not, will follow the path of every other movie factory in Hollywood and make franchise films that will safeguard them against taking more risks in other places. I hear you about Toy Story 3, but I do actually think that's a creative decision to end a trilogy, although Cars 2 has been made for no other reason, and without much denial, in fact, because the merchandise for the first film sold so well with...boys.

And boys is what Disney needs to target and bring on board if they have any hope of growing their bottom line, hence the purchase of Marvel Comics. And it won't be too long before the likes of Pixar and Marvel join forces to create new or existing projects...is anyone going to be surprised if Marvel brings out a John Carter comic book?

I wish they'd left Monsters, Inc. alone, but I'm guessing that the recent BD/DVD reissue sparked new interest in the film and tipped the sales over enough for Disney to commission a new film. With John Carter and other risky ventures in the wings for Pixar, I wouldn't be surprised if this was their "okay, we'll do a safe film like MI2, but in return we want $200m to do this!"

That's how the money games are played in Hollywoodland.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3845
Joined: May 31st, 2005
Location: Maryland

Post by Meg » April 23rd, 2010, 11:39 am

Good points Ben...I'm just selfish and want to see more original movies from Pixar, I guess! ;) In any case, I suppose having to put up with the occasional sequel or two is okay if it means we get more 'risky' films from the studio. But dang, I also kind of wish it was The Incredibles they were making a sequel to, since that's the only one I thought could have used one! :P

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 493
Joined: November 11th, 2007
Location: NY

Post by Foxtale » April 23rd, 2010, 11:54 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8639142.stm

Similar article. Also announced another Muppet movie.

Reese Witherspoon is going to be in Brave?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Foxtale/almostthere_signature_smaller.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3845
Joined: May 31st, 2005
Location: Maryland

Re: Monsters Inc. 2 / Brave discussion

Post by Meg » April 23rd, 2010, 12:43 pm

I thought the new Muppets movie was announced a while ago? Unless they're talking about a different one?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Macaluso » April 23rd, 2010, 1:27 pm

Well...

The title change to Brave from The Bear and the Bow doesn't bother me in the least, just like Tangled thing didn't bother me (I thought that was all such ridiculous nonsense over nothing). In fact, I think I prefer it more. It's like if UP was called "The old man and the house" or something.

As far as sequels go, if it was any other company (Dreamworks), I'd be weary of it. But they're Pixar, so I have total faith that they'll deliver quality sequels. Toy Story 2 was great. Toy Story 3 sounds like it's going to be amazing. I liked Cars, so I think Cars 2 will be good. I don't know what they'll do for Monsters Inc 2, but I'm sure they'll think of something good. If Pixar didn't have 10 amazing films behind them, I would probably not have faith in them. But it's Pixar so I trust them. And Cars 2, honestly if I was head of Pixar, I'd be all about cashing in on another Cars movie cause every little boy I see has a Cars shirt or toy with them.

That being said, I still really want to know what the deal is with Newt, and hope that it gets back on track. I also want to know the deal with the dinosaur thing!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 398
Joined: May 28th, 2009
Contact:

Re:

Post by estefan » April 23rd, 2010, 1:55 pm

Macaluso wrote:I also want to know the deal with the dinosaur thing!
I read a couple of days ago somewhere (Upcoming Pixar, I think) that it's part of a collaboration between Pixar and Discovery Channel to do a "Walking with Dinosaurs"-type series.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Macaluso » April 23rd, 2010, 2:20 pm

Ummm wow that's awesome

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1518
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Monsters Inc. 2 / Brave discussion

Post by droosan » April 23rd, 2010, 2:36 pm

IMO, Brave is a more 'Pixar-esque' title than The Bear and the Bow .. they've seemingly always applied the blandest (preferably one- or two-word) titles possible to their films .. which belies the imagination behind the movies themselves.

Post Reply