• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cars 2 - Pixar's first flop?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I think most trailers I watch of theirs I think the movie looks retarded, such as ratatouille and Up, and both of them have absolutely blown me away after watching the full length.
 
TheNinja said:
I would think they are going to deliver the goods on Cars 2. Practically every boy I know from 2 years old to 12 loves this move and buys all the toys, slippers, backpacks, etc. that goes with it. I would think this movie is one that everyone is looking forward to and I doubt Pixar will let it fail. Plus I think WALL-E was the first flop 😉
Click to expand...

WALL-E made me cry. That movie was brilliant. Ratatouille was their first flop.
 
It actually looks good. Trailer seems fun, what are you talking about. Pixar pulled Wall-E off with super ambiguous trailer and no dialogue. I never doubt Pixar.

It is rather random why they chose Cars for their sequel. I think it would be SO much more interesting to do The Incredibles (shape shifting baby!) or even Monsters Inc.

Why Cars?
 
A Pixar film has yet to disappoint me - they just deliver. I was worried about the original Cars when the trailer came out, but the film in its entirety was thumbs up! I hope the same goes for Cars 2.
 
Pixar once made all their trailers without a single bit of footage from the final film. The first "Cars" trailer was done this way. If you look back, it was terrible and not representative of the film AT ALL. Even so, I see much to like in this latest trailer, even if the story seems generic (wasn't the first one much the same?).
 
Zeze said:
It actually looks good. Trailer seems fun, what are you talking about. Pixar pulled Wall-E off with super ambiguous trailer and no dialogue. I never doubt Pixar.

It is rather random why they chose Cars for their sequel. I think it would be SO much more interesting to do The Incredibles (shape shifting baby!) or even Monsters Inc.

Why Cars?
Click to expand...

It's no secret that John Lasseter is a HUGE car buff and even runs auto shows in the Pixar parking lot. The first Cars was specifically for his sake, as I'm sure the next is. I hope this answers your question.
 
CZroe said:
It's no secret that John Lasseter is a HUGE car buff and even runs auto shows in the Pixar parking lot. The first Cars was specifically for his sake, as I'm sure the next is. I hope this answers your question.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling Pixar will definitely make The Incredibles sequel soon, because:

1. Everyone loves super hero movies, especially all the rage currently.

2. TI's plot format is so easy to just slap on another story. The original even ended with a new villain and the baby showcasing the new power (shape shifting)
 
Fritzo said:
WALL-E made me cry. That movie was brilliant. Ratatouille was their first flop.
Click to expand...

Budget: $150 million
Gross revenue: $623,722,818

making it a more successful movie (not including merchandise) than Wall-E or Cars

again, as someone else already put it, just because you didn't like it that doesn't mean its a flop
 
They are making cars 2 because cars was by far their most financially successful film. Maybe not ticket wise or dvdwise, but the merchandising was unbelievable compared to other pixar films. Its hard to make many toys out of wall-e or ratatoullie, but Cars naturally lends itself to thousands of different toys.
 
bunnyfubbles said:
Budget: $150 million
Gross revenue: $623,722,818

making it a more successful movie (not including merchandise) than Wall-E or Cars

again, as someone else already put it, just because you didn't like it that doesn't mean its a flop
Click to expand...

I was just quoting the review sites.
 
villageidiot111 said:
They are making cars 2 because cars was by far their most financially successful film. Maybe not ticket wise or dvdwise, but the merchandising was unbelievable compared to other pixar films. Its hard to make many toys out of wall-e or ratatoullie, but Cars naturally lends itself to thousands of different toys.
Click to expand...

that has to be it, because the movie was by far their worst rated (low 70s) and was also their 3rd lowest revenue, besting only Pixars' first two films in total revenue

sucks seeing them sell out
 
bunnyfubbles said:
what, where Ratatouille gets 96% from both Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes? General audience reviews are lower but they're still above 80% which puts it in relative elite status.
Click to expand...

Geeze, don't get all butt-hurt over an animated movie. I typed in "Pixar first flop" in Google and the first dozen hits or so pointed out Ratatouille was considered their first flop, and Pixar blamed Disney for not marketing it enough.
 
Fritzo said:
Geeze, don't get all butt-hurt over an animated movie. I typed in "Pixar first flop" in Google and the first dozen hits or so pointed out Ratatouille was considered their first flop, and Pixar blamed Disney for not marketing it enough.
Click to expand...

Not butt-hurt over a movie, I've actually never seen Ratatouille. I'm butt-hurt over people like you who have no idea what they're talking about. But at least you googled it 🙄

maybe if you would have done a tiny bit more research you'd have discovered a link like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pixar_films

which clearly and easily shows how each and every one of Pixar's films (11 of them) have been commercial and critical successes, 7 of the 11 are ranked in IMDB's top 200 and not one is ranked blow 70% (quite a feat), so they're popular amongst the public as well.

The only flops we can consider are either opinion or relatively speaking, of which only Cars or A Bug's Life could truly be considered given critical reception, public reception, and movie revenue place those two movies clearly at the bottom relative to the other 9.

Of course Cars has the merchandizing success going for it, but whether we want to factor that into movie vs. movie could be debated on it own.
 
astroidea said:
I think most trailers I watch of theirs I think the movie looks retarded, such as ratatouille and Up, and both of them have absolutely blown me away after watching the full length.
Click to expand...

exactly. I just blindly accept that whatever they do is going to be absolutely brilliant in some way, and they have not yet failed to deliver.
 
villageidiot111 said:
They are making cars 2 because cars was by far their most financially successful film. Maybe not ticket wise or dvdwise, but the merchandising was unbelievable compared to other pixar films. Its hard to make many toys out of wall-e or ratatoullie, but Cars naturally lends itself to thousands of different toys.
Click to expand...

K, but what about that movie, Toy Story?

:hmm:
 
Here is your answer
Merchandise tied to the Cars franchise has generated global retail sales of more than $8 billion, Walt Disney said Monday. That makes it one of the company’s top franchises at what are now $2 billion in global retail sales annually.

Disney detailed the merchandise strength of Disney/Pixar hit Cars, which has grown its retail business since its launch in 2006, here on Monday as the entertainment giant unveiled what it expects to be its largest licensed film merchandise program ever for Cars 2.

In an event tied to Toy Fair, which opened here this weekend, Disney brought Cars 2 voice actors Michael Caine and Emily Mortimer to the stage to help unveil a line of more than 300 toys for the June 24 release. Over 200 million die-cast cars tied to the franchise have sold to-date, the company said.
Click to expand...
 
I've heard rumors that Monsters Inc is the next Pixar movie to get a sequel. That to me seems like an odd choice, but I'd be happy to see another one.
 
zinfamous said:
I *think* (as with Toy Story 1) Nemo was rendered at sub 1080, maybe even sub-720 resolution?

I could be wrong on this, though. truly fucks things up when the content is pure digital.

same issue with the shitty new Star Wars movies. Not that any sane person would care to own those, though.
Click to expand...

Nope. Pixar always re-renders for BD releases. Also, the 35mm film is way higher than 720p. Pixar knows it'd be a shame to leave out any bit of detail.

The reason is: Catalog releases are staggered. I'm still waiting for Aladdin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top