I also don't understand really the purpose of this. And with Chris Evans doing the voice? Weird.
Still, the trailer looks cool, if it was a new IP I'd be psyched for this. Using "Starman" from Bowie always works.
They threw John Lasseter under the bus in 2018. He was the guy who built Pixar... and it seems, the one that kept it alive.
Good news, he's now head of another studio, Skydance, and there's two movies coming in 2022: Luck and Spellbound. Maybe that could be the new Pixar.
I was a huge of Lasseter but imo, Pixar was already on the way down years before letting him go.
shareWhy be creative when you can make a billion off being lazy?
shareBecause this is Pixar we're talking about. If it was Dreamworks or Illumination then it's totally fine.
Pixar was supposed to be a beacon of light. The peak creative and anything artful, not just another "business." They were inspirations to many children and adults alike. Artists all over the world dreamed to work for Pixar to create masterpieces, not simply be a random cog in a money printing machine.
Turned out it's over now. It's not about being lazy, it's a betrayal.
This won't be just a standalone origin story, right?
shareOf course not. This is the beginning of Pixar Cinematic Universe (PCU).
share
There's already a Pixar Cinematic Universe:
http://www.pixartheory.com
Interesting.
shareSomeone put a lot of effort in that website for such a crackpot theory.
shareSeems like a missed opportunity to not have Tim Allen voice the character. Just like if you had a film based on Woody and didn't utilize Tom Hanks.
shareI wouldn't want them to use Tim Allen or Tom Hanks. They're the voices of literal toys. If we're going to see "real" human versions of Buzz and Woody, I'd prefer they be different actors, because the characters are different.
Does that make sense? The fact that Allen's Buzz and Hanks's Woody are toys plays heavily into who they are as movie characters. Their whole reason to exist (to be played with by children) is inseparable from their existence as toys.
Anyways, that's why I'm glad they didn't use Tim Allen.
Yeah I get it, it's supposed to be the "real world" character, but it's still an animated film. Doesn't mean the toy couldn't sound like the real person. I feel like Tim Allen is that character so maybe it would be nice to have that actor do something different with that particular role. And since it is animated and not live action, we don't have to worry about his age. if it was live action, makes complete sense to cast a new actor. But, to each their own.
shareOnward, Luca, and Soul were "creative". No one saw them.
shareI saw all of them. Couldn't finish Luca and Soul cause they're bad. But at least my son does love Luca. And we both watched Onward multiple times. Okay, 2 times. Still multiple.
shareWait a minute, so they weren't automatically good because they were original?
shareOf course not. Why would they?
Luca actually made me angry. It was so good when it was about mermaids (merboys? merlads?). Both me and my kid enjoyed it, fascinated by the beautiful setting. It's so good and full of creativity. Very funny too.
But everything changed when the fire nation attacked. I mean, when they got out of the water. Suddenly it became a generic cartoon. I groaned and left the tv. When I came back they already finished the race.
And the ending doesn't make any sense. People are actually okay when they find out that the boys are mermaids? WTF?? My son didn't seem to care. But I puked.
Soul? Even my son couldn't finish it. And he's 7. It's THAT bad.
You are annoyed that this movie is being made because it isn't original and I just got you to admit you didn't like at leas 2 out of the last 3 original movies.
shareI don't understand what's your objection here? My annoyances are not exclusive.
So do you mean I can only get annoyed by an uncreative rehash if I love their bad but original movies?
One doesn't have anything to do with the other.
So if an original movie doesn't guarantee good quality, then you thinking maybe writing one off for being a sequel/spinoff could be kinda short-sighted?
shareWhy are you so adamant that an original movie has to be good? Is this written in stones or what?
Nothing can guarantee any movie to be good, original or otherwise.
I don't understand what you want here?
Why do you assume I'm writing off this movie? I will certainly watch it. I already said above, I have a little boy. Of course we will consume any and every Disney and Pixar movie.
I was simply annoyed because Pixar, the most creative, most revered animation studio in the world, made a yet another Toy Story is totally uncreative. I would prefer a new idea. Am I asking too much from THE best here?
If you just wanted to bash me then I have nothing to say. This is the Internet anyway. Say what you want.
"Why are you so adamant that an original movie has to be good?"
YOU are. You're the one criticizing a company specifically for not making something original, all while admitting the recent original movies they made aren't good. Original, spinoff, sequel, whatever is irrelevant to quality.
Why are all your arguments so terrible?
shareno tim allen no $ from me
share