A.BAD.PIXAR.FILM ?

[BORTZ]

The Hangover part II was met with negative review, and now Cars 2 is.
Even worse than that, Harry Potter 7.2 will possilbly not be shown in my country with unknown reason at the time.

The first hang over wasnt that good anyways and then they go and make a movie with the same people, same premise, and same humor? Its not going to be good anyways.
Cars 2 had very flat characters. Cars 2 was only made because Disney leaned on Pixar begging them to produce a cash cow that could be milked for mechandise. Which makes sense if you think about it. Wall E and UP had almost nothing marketable where as Cars/2 has anything and everything that can be made into a toy and sold. The story was based on the misconception that Mater, a SIDE, COMIC RELIEF CHARACTER, was a secret agent and then used as the main character. Not a good set up. Other than that, i checked out when the cars started flying.
And please dont get me started on Harry Potter.

For those of you saying Toy Story 3 was bad? I want your reasons.
It was one the the better Pixar films.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

For those of you saying Toy Story 3 was bad? I want your reasons.
It was one the the better Pixar films.

Main reason, it bored me. First time I tried to watch it I got maybe half way through and had to stop. Normally that bothers me until I get to finish it but with that... I didn't get around to watching it all the way through until I watched it with my niece months later. Maybe too simplistic a reason for some but if something can't hold my attention it's instantly crap in my opinion. Especially as I'm not normally the sort of person who minds things not moving along at a break neck speed.

EDIT: Sorry but I can't go any deeper than that. It's being years since I've had to analyse a film/show/book whatever beyond whether I liked it or not. But hey, if I don't join in the conversation I'll never get it back.[/p]

And TBH I'm not surprised that peeps aren't liking this. While most Pixar movies generally follow a typical archetype (buddy movie, lone hero saves the kingdom) but with a cool twist that seriously influences the storyline, Cars was just a fish out of water movie a la Doc Hollywood with cars instead of people. It could have being done just as well with people instead of cars...

 

[granville]

Toy Story 3 was awesome. The only issues i had with it was a lack of memorable music compared from the first and second ones and that the villain was too obvious and uninteresting compared to the other two. But on an emotional level, it was very moving. The ending made my eyes fog up. Letting go of the things that defined our childhood can be difficult.

I guess it didn't help any that i was going through a very similar situation with letting go at the same time that i saw the movie last year (moving away from a home i grew up in and knowing it would be destroyed once i was out). The film clicked with me on an emotional level. Probably moreso than most other films actually ever have. Heck, i was even going through old closets and finding old all-but-forgotten toys that i either donated or had to throw away due to massive flood damage to the house.

TS3 will always have a special place in my heart for me. It definitely didn't feel like a cash in either, not any more than the other 3 did (which is subjective i'm sure due to all the toy products and licenses from pre-existing brands, but they're all amazingly written with fun characters and a gripping plot).

 

[notmeanymore]

Pixar you [censored]!
Where is Monsters Inc. 2?

The Laugh Floor Comedy Club at Walt Disney World could be considered a sequel to Monsters Inc.

 

[smile72]

I didn't mind the first Cars. I couldn't stand Cars 2.

 

[pigonthetree]

Although still well-made, but it is likely to become the worst history of Pixar's work, more or less attributed to Pixar ─ ─ This level is too high before. If it is not the Pixar movie, it is just Ok.