Monsters University

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5491
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Monsters University

Post by Dacey » June 13th, 2013, 11:47 pm

Not gonna jump the gun and expect this to be a bad movie based off one or two negative reviews. Overally, what I've read about this film so far has been almost shockingly possitive.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 14th, 2013, 7:26 am

“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 15th, 2013, 12:45 pm

“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19247
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Re: Monsters University

Post by Ben » June 16th, 2013, 10:05 am

Randall wrote:I don't think Pixar has made a "bad" film yet, but they've certainly slipped a little.
Oh, I don't know. Cars 2 "slipped" pretty far...

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 17th, 2013, 11:34 am

“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7217
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Re: Monsters University

Post by James » June 17th, 2013, 11:38 am

Until someone else can consistently make better movies than Pixar I'm not going to criticize them for doing what everyone else is allowed to do without complaint.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 17th, 2013, 11:40 am

“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7217
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Re: Monsters University

Post by James » June 17th, 2013, 4:09 pm

I was thinking about this more today and am having trouble putting my finger on what the problem is everyone is having.

Vi says it's flawed and at this rate she has low expectations for Dory. But in the HTTYD 2 thread she said that sequel "Sounds like it could be something great! Really excited!". Then in the Kung Fu Panda 3 she said "I'm very happy about this... can't wait to see what happens!"

Does DreamWorks really deserve the benefit of the doubt on sequels over Pixar? Are expectations really higher for the third Panda movie than the second Nemo movie?

Randall says "Pixar takes another step towards the dark side of commerce over art".

Let's look at the other steps they took on that path. They've only released three sequels to date:

- Toy Story 2: winner of the Golden Globe for Best Picture; still to this day the top rated film by the critics according to Rotten Tomatoes

- Toy Story 3: nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture, won the Oscar for Best Animated Film

- Cars 2

That's a pretty good track record. Cars 2 and Toy Story 3 were made at the same time so this isn't the case of past glories.

Pixar has 18 films released or announced - 5 are sequels. Any other studios have an original to sequel ratio better than that?

As I've said before if Cars 2 -- a film despite critical accolades is beloved by kids based on merchandise sales -- helps pay the bills for the risks Pixar takes that no other studio does, I'm all in.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5491
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Monsters University

Post by Dacey » June 17th, 2013, 4:41 pm

That's because DreamWorks is taking a very big risk with Dragon 2, as they are aging the characters and making the story much bigger. Monsters University, however you feel about it, looks about as safe as these things get! And Cars 2--which focused on the first movie's most popular character--also did things very by the numbers in that regard (and no, I'm not a member of the "Cars 2 Sucks" club).

Also, Kung Fu Panda 2 was VERY good--much better than Cars 2, however you may feel about that film. So with the exception of Shrek the Third, yes, I would say that DreamWorks has more than earned the benefit of the doubt with sequels. They were even able to make the Puss in Boots spinoff work for the most part.

This is not to say I have a "bad feeling" about Dory, nor does it mean that I am expecting MU to be dissapointing. But it does mean I am much, much more excited about Dragon 2 and Panda 3 than I am about those films.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 17th, 2013, 4:44 pm

OK, my feelings are basically this:

I totally understand why Pixar has to make sequels to these films--so they can make riskier ones. Totally get that.

1.) Cars was a mediocre film that artistically didn't need a sequel. But I totally understand that they need the money, so I'm not knocking them for it.
2.) Nemo doesn't need a continuation IMHO. Like Ben said everything was wrapped up nicely at the end. Dory was a great character but I just don't find her interesting enough to warrent a film of her own.
3.) I actually wouldn't mind a MI sequel at all; it's the idea of a PREQUEL that I objected to, for the reasons I gave. Also, like I said I definitely feel that MI deserved the Oscar over Shrek.
4.) DW isn't the DW of 2001. They've significantly evolved since then and give artists much more room than before. Their films are also flawed occasionally--what films aren't--but their SharkTale/Shrek Karaoke days are over.
5.) IMHO both HTTYD and KFP do merit sequels. Finding Nemo doesn't. That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to see other Pixar sequels: Incredibles for one, and MI as well.
“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3417
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Monsters University

Post by EricJ » June 17th, 2013, 5:51 pm

ShyViolet wrote:1.) Cars was a mediocre film that artistically didn't need a sequel. But I totally understand that they need the money, so I'm not knocking them for it.
Again: They didn't "need the money", Bob Iger was just feeling a little picked on from analysts' feeding frenzy of "Cars 1 flopped!" after it didn't meet an unrealistic BO weekend prediction, and, like with Tiana in Princess/Frog, wanted to "prove" that it had a solid marketing base with fans, so there.
And it was an easy sell to John Lasseter, who heard "World Rally", and wanted to make the better part of the film than we got with all that Mater marketing.
2.) Nemo doesn't need a continuation IMHO. Like Ben said everything was wrapped up nicely at the end. Dory was a great character but I just don't find her interesting enough to warrent a film of her own.
3.) I actually wouldn't mind a MI sequel at all; it's the idea of a PREQUEL that I objected to, for the reasons I gave. Also, like I said I definitely feel that MI deserved the Oscar over Shrek.
And again, both movies are Circle 7 casualties: Most at the time wanted to do C7's "Boo grows up" MI sequel anyway, as they considered it pretty darn good, but ownership insisted that Pixar write their own from scratch. In retrospect, would've seemed too much like Toy Story 3's ending anyway.
(And it did deserve the Oscar, but '01 was a very, very contentious and troubled time for the industry...)
4.) DW isn't the DW of 2001. They've significantly evolved since then and give artists much more room than before. Their films are also flawed occasionally--what films aren't--but their SharkTale/Shrek Karaoke days are over.
(Insert Turbo trailer here.)
Although most of the "Loser", "Seth Rogen sidekick" and "80's Karaoke" days have now been picked up at a flea market by the post-Meledandri BlueSky Studios of "Rio" and "Epic", so there's no getting rid of them just yet. They'll still be around to embarrass the current DW--"Shaddup, shaddup, we're not like that anymore; we've got a Dragons sequel, and a really, really popular and long-awaited Panda sequel!"

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8125
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Monsters University

Post by ShyViolet » June 17th, 2013, 6:17 pm

Like I said, DW films ARE flawed, but many, many reviewers have commented on recent films that they've evolved (particularly with HTTYD). Even Megamind looked like "typical DW fare" but then it was released and proved itself as a heartwarming story even with all the "DW lines" in the ads. Turbo hasn't been released yet, so let's wait until it is to judge.
“Like a balloon and...something bad happens!”

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5491
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Monsters University

Post by Dacey » June 17th, 2013, 6:50 pm

Again: They didn't "need the money", Bob Iger was just feeling a little picked on from analysts' feeding frenzy of "Cars 1 flopped!" after it didn't meet an unrealistic BO weekend prediction, and, like with Tiana in Princess/Frog, wanted to "prove" that it had a solid marketing base with fans, so there.
Actually...none of that is true. From my understanding, Cars 2 was greenlit primarily because merchandise sales for Cars were PHENOMENAL--enough to rival even Disney's princess line--, so not only did a sequel ensure strong theatrical/DVD sales, it also meant they could make a lot more toys.

But I could be wrong. It could be that Eric is within Pixar's walls, and able to have private conversations with Bob Iger, which would be the only way he could know this stuff!

Also, not that it matters, but there was no "Seth Rogen sidekick" in Epic or Rio, and unless I'm wrong he only had a major role in Monsters Vs. Aliens (in which he was very funny), as his character in the Kung Fu Panda movies was only a bit character. But I digress.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3417
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Monsters University

Post by EricJ » June 17th, 2013, 9:40 pm

Dacey wrote:
Again: They didn't "need the money", Bob Iger was just feeling a little picked on from analysts' feeding frenzy of "Cars 1 flopped!" after it didn't meet an unrealistic BO weekend prediction, and, like with Tiana in Princess/Frog, wanted to "prove" that it had a solid marketing base with fans, so there.
Actually...none of that is true. From my understanding, Cars 2 was greenlit primarily because merchandise sales for Cars were PHENOMENAL--enough to rival even Disney's princess line--, so not only did a sequel ensure strong theatrical/DVD sales, it also meant they could make a lot more toys.
If the sheer, unremitting nonstop crap Jim Hill put Iger through after "Cars will outgross Nemo!" was only a representative fraction of what Iger got from knee-jerk Hollywood analysts at the time--and it's pretty easy to historically vouch for the fact it was--I'd play to the fans and make a sequel to shut him up, too. You don't have to be an "insider" to know that one.
Any fan who was out there a year and a half ago saying "Shaddup, John Carter was a good film and you haven't even seen it!" will have some vestigial idea of what Iger was going through.
(And I'll believe Lasseter when he said he wanted to do the good-Lightning plot, I rather preferred that half of the film myself.)
Also, not that it matters, but there was no "Seth Rogen sidekick" in Epic or Rio, and unless I'm wrong he only had a major role in Monsters Vs. Aliens (in which he was very funny), as his character in the Kung Fu Panda movies was only a bit character. But I digress.
Well, technically, we only had a George Lopez sidekick in Rio, and Aziz Ansari as the Token-Slacker snail in Epic. Picky. But hey, Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, even DW can't tell the difference anymore...

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5491
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Monsters University

Post by Dacey » June 17th, 2013, 10:05 pm

:roll:
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

Post Reply