PDA

View Full Version : Brad Bird on an Incredibles Sequel AND PIXAR's view on doing hand-drawn features


RobertoOrtiz
03-01-2005, 04:50 PM
Quote:
"We asked Bird if there are any plans for a sequel. "If I had an idea that I felt was as good and better than the one we did, you don't just want to repeat yourself. You want to take it in a new direction. If I could find something as good as 'Toy Story 2 (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/topnews.php?id=8536#)' was to 'Toy Story', I would love to return to the world. But I think it's also about assembling the original team and respecting the audience and all of that. I think if those things can happen, I love the characters and I love the
world and I'd love to do more with them."

With more and more studios turning to computer animation, Bird was asked if he thought Pixar would ever make a hand-drawn feature. "It's the strangest wish fulfillment thing for everyone to want that. I don't kn(ow of any plans to do it, but I also know that this company never says never to anything. I think the only thing they say 'never' to is they will never cheap out and do something less than cynical and give the audience less than what they expect in terms of Pixar's best. Every time I think that I figured them out in terms of what they're gonna do, something shifts and something new happens there. So, there are no plans to do one, but the moment that I said it will never happen, probably someone would say, 'Hey! Have you heard about the new hand-drawn project?' It's a wild place; it does not exist to put technology on the screen, it exists for character and stories. And if they felt there was a story better told hand-drawn, I don't think the fact they are know for computer animation would stop them."
>>Link<< (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/topnews.php?id=8536)
-R
"

Lil_Mick
03-01-2005, 05:03 PM
Nice. I'm happy to hear about his position on a sequel. Too many sequels are made with the intent on making money (especially with straight to dvd releases) and not as much effort is put into the story.

~J

kiaran
03-01-2005, 05:20 PM
Brad Bird has his (and Pixar's) priorities straight. I would love to see a sequel to The Incredibles, but only if it can tell a new and equally interesting story.

As for Pixar doing a fully 2d animation, I doubt it. But we can dream...

MarkusM
03-01-2005, 05:24 PM
With the Disney vs Pixar drama as a backdrop... I wonder who ownes the rights to do a sequel.

brrrh... that's chills up my spine.

BrockSamson
03-01-2005, 05:25 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Brad Bird and Pixar have no say weather or not there is a sequel, it's up to Disney. (Shudder)

Shaderhacker
03-01-2005, 05:27 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Brad Bird and Pixar have no say weather or not there is a sequel, it's up to Disney. (Shudder)

That is partially correct. If Pixar decides to do a sequel, they will be under the old contract of Disney. Which basically means it will be done 50%/50% with the small distribution fee from Disney. If Pixar decides not to do a sequel, then it will be totally up to Disney to do one. In that case, I guess you should all not bother to see it since it isn't going to be done by Pixar...:rolleyes:

-M

SpiralFace
03-01-2005, 05:30 PM
I agree with everything thats been said here.

But I also hope that Pixar at least concider doing a sequil to that movie, there is so many directions that the movie could go after the ending in the first one that I can see almost any sequil being just as good as the first with the original team behind the wheel. Although I'm sure that their plate is full at the moment simply becuase they are now the hottest animation studio in the world, and although they are leaving Disney after cars, I'm sure that they already have many new Ideas for whomever they go to next, and makeing another Incredibles movie will most likely mean going back to Disney, becuase correct me if I'm wrong, but Disney still holds copy rights on the Title, and the characters right?

hypercube
03-01-2005, 05:52 PM
In that case, I guess you should all not bother to see it since it isn't going to be done by Pixar...:rolleyes:

Your zest for Pixar bashing aside, for this particular movie, I wouldn't bother because it's not going to be done by Brad Bird..I seriously don't think anyone can follow up his work properly except him. Could you honestly see an Iron Giant sequel done by anyone else either? He's what made the films and characters what they are, IMO.

And the same is true for many other movies, I don't understand the attitude that it's different just because they're CG..if anything it's MORE important in animation to have the original team..especially given disney's track record at making hastily cranked out underwhelming sequels for properties that deserved better. And also given disney's seeming posture that they're definitely making the sequels to make money, or almost out of spite for pixar, I just don't expect them to give them the care they need.

At any rate it's no different than when the sequel to a live action movie isn't done by the original director/team..sometimes it works, a lot of times it doesn't, and most of the time the motives for making a sequel aren't the right ones either. :shrug:

DZL
03-01-2005, 05:53 PM
as much as i liked 'the incredibles', i don't have an interest to see a sequel... i thought the story was perfect - and the movie had a great ending.

i'd rather have them continue creating new characters, new stories...etc.

however, they've proven that they can outdo themselves (toy story 2); and if brad bird was onboard, i'm sure it would be a success.

heavyness
03-01-2005, 07:28 PM
speaking of sequels and Brad Bird, who owns the rights and how much would it cost Pixar to buy the rights to do an Iron Giant 2?

i hope Disney never tries to do an incredibles sequel...

Shaderhacker
03-01-2005, 09:13 PM
Your zest for Pixar bashing aside, for this particular movie, I wouldn't bother because it's not going to be done by Brad Bird..I seriously don't think anyone can follow up his work properly except him. Could you honestly see an Iron Giant sequel done by anyone else either? He's what made the films and characters what they are, IMO.

You don't know if it's going to be done by Brad Bird. It's all just talk. I'm sure if Disney wanted to make a sequel and Pixar didn't want to do it, you'd think that they'd try to get Brad Bird to direct it. The point of my statement is to simply say you don't know how good *ANY* film is going to be until it comes out. Instead of making sweeping statements as most Pixar fanboys on these boards do, let's just see what happens. Perhaps Pixar will make the movie. Perhaps not. What matters is whether it will live up to expectations like the first one, regardless who makes it.


-M

Shaderhacker
03-01-2005, 09:14 PM
I..and makeing another Incredibles movie will most likely mean going back to Disney, becuase correct me if I'm wrong, but Disney still holds copy rights on the Title, and the characters right?

True.

-M

Shaderhacker
03-01-2005, 09:21 PM
...especially given disney's track record at making hastily cranked out underwhelming sequels for properties that deserved better. And also given disney's seeming posture that they're definitely making the sequels to make money, or almost out of spite for pixar, I just don't expect them to give them the care they need.

Again you are making sweeping statements. You've not seen any of the CG movies coming out by Disney yet, so how do you know what's good and what's not going to be good? This is exactly why I made the statement I did. Sony, Dreamworks, and Blue Sky all have movies on the horizon. Some sequels, others original. Does that mean that they won't be any good because they didn't have the original team involved? There are people leaving companies all the time. Some very valuable to the team at that time, some not. You just never know how good a movie will be until it actually hits theatres.


-M

BRUTICUS
03-01-2005, 09:59 PM
speaking of sequels and Brad Bird, who owns the rights and how much would it cost Pixar to buy the rights to do an Iron Giant 2?

i hope Disney never tries to do an incredibles sequel...



Pixar doing an Iron Giant sequal, id love to see that. Hogarth goes to Iron World.

heavyness
03-02-2005, 02:59 AM
sorry to get off topic...


but isn't The Incredibles and The Iron Giant set in the same time period in US histroy?

crossover? hogarth and the iron giant come to the aid of The Inredibles!

caulfield
03-02-2005, 07:38 AM
A bunch of the guys at Pixar already have completed a fully 2D feature film...maybe more than one.

Just look through Disney's catalogue.

caulfield
03-02-2005, 08:07 AM
And judging by the extent of Eisner's wisdom to Date, I wouldn't be surprised if we see 'The Incredibles save Simba from the half Dumbo half Pinochio Monster: as narrated by the Seven Dwarves dressed as the cast of Toy Story - 3D!!!'
He'll take that licence to his grave. Or sell it to Miramax. And if the trend at the time is to make puppet movies out of Eskimo whale bone trinkets, then that's how it will be done.

And get Brad Bird to direct? Why would he do that? It would cost a lot more, and nobody's NOT going to watch it if he doesn't.

If it'll get the job done, Eisner's dog could probably get that position...but I heard Eisner's dog ran away out of shame. And chewed off his name tag.

Gotta remember - Eisner doesn't care if the films he makes dissappoint people. His parents were probably weirdoes who took him to see nature documentaries while the other kids were watching real movies. And then they probably dressed him up as a girl or something.

All he cares about is the ability of a movie to make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time - and good movies don't always make the most cash. Just look at...hmmm, so many to chose from. Let's say, anything with Vin Diesel.

Do you really think the average teenage american really gives a rats about who directed? Or the value of themes? Or the story? Or the depth of the characters?

Probably not. Sad, but true.

An dthat's why they're all going to hell.

Tocpe
03-02-2005, 04:03 PM
Gotta remember - Eisner doesn't care if the films he makes dissappoint people. His parents were probably weirdoes who took him to see nature documentaries while the other kids were watching real movies. And then they probably dressed him up as a girl or something.

All he cares about is the ability of a movie to make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time - and good movies don't always make the most cash. Just look at...hmmm, so many to chose from. Let's say, anything with Vin Diesel.

lol not to defend Eisner or anything like that cause he's not exactly my favorite person in the world, his parents weren't wierdos. But they did take Mikey and his siblings to plays and other hoity-toity upper class forms of entertainment rather than the "common cartoons". In the new book Disney War (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0684809931/) it's revealed that Eisner hadn't even seen many of the Disney films when he took the position as CEO in 1984, and that he hadn't seen *any* of them as a child.

And it's also revealed that his personal motto in business is "more for less".

something to think about...

hypercube
03-02-2005, 06:14 PM
Shaderhacker, all I was doing was expressing my personal opinions based on all the information available to me and my past experiences, which last I checked is how people form opinions and speculate on possible outcomes of future events. And they're just that, my opinions and thoughts. They're not true for anyone else, and I never said they were. I don't see any sweeping statements from anyone but you. You want a disclaimer on every post?

But, whatever. Not having all the facts before a movie is finished/released is the norm, and people have to decide for themselves what they THINK the movie is going to be like before they go see it or not, based on articles, press, trailers, and whatever else. This isn't any different. Just as when people may go see a movie simply based on who's creating it (specific directors, writers, stars etc. with a track record of movies they like), some won't see a movie simply based on who's creating it (Uwe Boll, etc.).

At any rate, in the same way a movie MIGHT not automatically be BAD before it comes out, doesn't mean it'll automatically be GOOD, either. I'll believe it when I see it.

Shaderhacker
03-02-2005, 09:57 PM
I don't see any sweeping statements from anyone but you. You want a disclaimer on every post?

Where do I make any sweeping statements? The assumption that most people here won't want to see any sequel to a Pixar movie unless it's made by Pixar? That's not sweeping.


But, whatever. Not having all the facts before a movie is finished/released is the norm, and people have to decide for themselves what they THINK the movie is going to be like before they go see it or not, based on articles, press, trailers, and whatever else. This isn't any different. Just as when people may go see a movie simply based on who's creating it (specific directors, writers, stars etc. with a track record of movies they like), some won't see a movie simply based on who's creating it (Uwe Boll, etc.).

At any rate, in the same way a movie MIGHT not automatically be BAD before it comes out, doesn't mean it'll automatically be GOOD, either. I'll believe it when I see it.

Which is what you should've said in the first place.

...especially given disney's track record at making hastily cranked out underwhelming sequels for properties that deserved better. And also given disney's seeming posture that they're definitely making the sequels to make money, or almost out of spite for pixar, I just don't expect them to give them the care they need.

THIS is a sweeping statement about Disney on a movie that isn't even in the works!

I bet that you assume Toy Story 3 will be trash too because it's not put out by Pixar, right?

-M

caulfield
03-02-2005, 11:48 PM
get a room

ArtisticVisions
03-03-2005, 07:19 PM
Again you are making sweeping statements. You've not seen any of the CG movies coming out by Disney yet, so how do you know what's good and what's not going to be good?
It's not the technology which makes a film a good... it's the people behind it. :rolleyes:

Shaderhacker
03-03-2005, 07:22 PM
It's not the technology which makes a film a good... it's the people behind it. :rolleyes:

True. So your point is.....?

-M

ghostent
03-03-2005, 09:55 PM
Thanks for the link Roberto...I sure hope for a sequel.:)

ArtisticVisions
03-04-2005, 01:24 AM
True. So your point is.....?

That in the past 6-7 years, the majority of Disney's animated films (note: I didn't say all of their films) have been severely lacking in the storytelling department; true, there has been some standouts, but the majority of them aren't even on the same level when it comes to Pixar's films. I ask you, has there been any of Pixar's films that have utterly failed with audiences since they started making movies? No.

I bet that you assume Toy Story 3 will be trash too because it's not put out by Pixar, right?
Ever see Buzz Lightyear of Star Command? That is what happens when Disney takes control over a Pixar property without any regard to story or character: it was create solely because Toy Story was a profitable film and because Disney thought it could make a bigger profit if they used one of it's characters in a sub-standard property.

Ultimately, Pixar succeed over Disney not because they use 3D animation, but because they understand what truly makes a film great: story and character. Disney, however, blamed the medium of 2D animation and dumped it in favor of 3D.
Do you really believe that just because they're now producing 3D animated films that their story-telling ability will improve?

No... I don't think it will...

pogonip
03-04-2005, 10:23 AM
Ultimately, Pixar succeed over Disney not because they use 3D animation, but because they understand what truly makes a film great: story and character. Disney, however, blamed the medium of 2D animation and dumped it in favor of 3D.
Do you really believe that just because they're now producing 3D animated films that their story-telling ability will improve?

No... I don't think it will...

I think you are dead wrong there . Emporer's New Groove was a very good Disney movie as was Lilo & Stitch and they both did not do well at the Box Office . What is Disney supposed to do if 2 very good animated films do bad while Pixar is racking in the cash ...i'd switch to 3D also ! I think the Audience evolved and people want something a little more real and not so cutsey, I think the main magic with Pixar's success is that Children & adults can enjoy them were Disney films really only appealed to kids and animation geeks .

Ohh and for the people who keep saying " I hope Disney does not do a sequal..etc etc " I am 99% sure that if you looked at the Senior people working at Pixar everything from Animators to Designers probebly worked at Disney at some point or another . Pixar produces there movies in the style that Disney pioneered over the last 100 years . Iv'e been a fan of Disney since I was a kid and I hope they someday return to greatness but don't blame the Disney feature animation studio for being incompetent ..come on...bash Micheal Eisner or any of the other greedy leaches in senior managment there but Disney feature animation is still home to some of the most talented artists & story designers on this planet !!!

ArtisticVisions
03-04-2005, 01:53 PM
I think you are dead wrong there . Emporer's New Groove was a very good Disney movie as was Lilo & Stitch and they both did not do well at the Box Office.
As I had before, there were some standouts films among the mediocrity of the majority of their films in the last decade. (both of the examples you posted I enjoyed watching as well)

What is Disney supposed to do if 2 very good animated films do bad while Pixar is racking in the cash ...i'd switch to 3D also ! I think the Audience evolved and people want something a little more real and not so cutsey, I think the main magic with Pixar's success is that Children & adults can enjoy them were Disney films really only appealed to kids and animation geeks.
On one hand, I agree with that statement... and on the other hand, I think it's backwards. In my opinion, it was because Disney has been releasing substandard films (which happen to be 2D) while Pixar has been releasing good - even great - films (which happen to be 3D) which caused audiences to to make the assumption that: 2D=bad, poor; 3D=great, excellent.

Disney also choose to put blame on the 2D medium, saying that it was obsolete in favor of the "new wave", 3D animation. However, it was that attitude which further reinforced the idea that "2D=bad" with audiences; as such, the majority of US audiences believe that if a animated is 3D, it will be a "good" film.

Gentle Fury
03-04-2005, 02:49 PM
I bet that you assume Toy Story 3 will be trash too because it's not put out by Pixar, right?


yup.

I think it would be so amazing if Pixar decided to do a 2D animation. It would be such ideal timing to do such a thing. Everyone is all about 3D animation right now. Disney just jumped on the bandwagon to no longer produce anything 2D for the theater anymore....It would be so great to see Pixar sweep in and make a new classic 2D film, proving that it makes NO DIFFERENCE what tools you use to make a movie....it's all about the story and the characters! Why won't any of these damn animation studios learn that???

Seriously, aside from a few wow moments in The Incredibles was there really anything in it that hasn't been done before? While everyone is striving for the next big Eye Candy moment, Pixar strives for a great story with great characters that you can really relate to, no matter how odd they may be.

Keep em comin.....

CyberGolem
03-04-2005, 08:31 PM
I go back and forth on my expectations for Disney. I think they're solid storytellers, they just lack a good story to tell. I'm hoping they recover from their self-inflicted demise and recover some old glory. The reason why I say this is that the more $ucce$$ful anim-houses out there, the more jobs and interest in this industry. Ultimately, the better for us in general.


With the Disney vs Pixar drama as a backdrop... I wonder who ownes the rights to do a sequel.

brrrh... that's chills up my spine.

Shaderhacker
03-06-2005, 02:28 AM
Disney also choose to put blame on the 2D medium, saying that it was obsolete in favor of the "new wave", 3D animation. However, it was that attitude which further reinforced the idea that "2D=bad" with audiences; as such, the majority of US audiences believe that if a animated is 3D, it will be a "good" film.

Oh come off it! You act like Disney put an end to 2D. Heck, Dreamworks' Sinbad did poorly and they said forget about 2d too. Even Fox got rid of 2d when Titan A.E. failed. The general public just doesn't like 2d that much anymore. The day that Pixar comes out with a 2d film that is successful, is the day you can blame the other studios for dropping 2d.

-M

Shaderhacker
03-06-2005, 02:31 AM
yup.

I think it would be so amazing if Pixar decided to do a 2D animation. It would be such ideal timing to do such a thing. Everyone is all about 3D animation right now. Disney just jumped on the bandwagon to no longer produce anything 2D for the theater anymore....It would be so great to see Pixar sweep in and make a new classic 2D film, proving that it makes NO DIFFERENCE what tools you use to make a movie....it's all about the story and the characters! Why won't any of these damn animation studios learn that???

Because these studios want the big bucks. Since Finding Nemo surpassed Lion King and Shrek 2 surpassed Nemo, you have no point as far as revenue is concerned. And I do believe all of these companies are about revenue..

-M

BillSpradlin
03-06-2005, 02:57 AM
The bottom line with any company is the almighty dollar. Making great movies is a large variable in determining how much of that money a studio is going to make.

CGTalk Moderation
03-06-2005, 02:57 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.