Pixar's Next Movie: The Incredibles

An anonymous reader writes: "The trailer for Pixar's next film, The Incredibles, is on the web. It's available from the official Incredibles site, the Apple trailers page, and Pixar's website. Lots of info on the official page as well! Enjoy!"

What the???

[tha_mink]

I thought that Pixar split from the Disney Empire? What's up with that?

Adult films

[Black_Logic]

This really isn't meant as flamebait. Pixar's movies are extremely cool looking but I really wish they'd make some movies that weren't oriented towards children. I recognize that there's a lot of content in them that is geared towards adults. Besides keeping the parents mildly entertained while their kids enjoy the movie I'm it also has to do with the reason pixar's movies do so well. But even so, why no adult content? THere's definitely this pervasive attitude that animation is the domain of children only in America. (I'm probably pegging myself as an anime nerd here. :) )

And btw, by 'geared towards adults' I certainly don't mean sex and explosions, that doesn't hurt though if the plot is interesting and supports it.

Re:What the???

[grape jelly]

Pixar was never "in" the Disney empire. They merely worked with each other. Basically, their agreement to work with each other is terminated in the sense that they aren't going to make any more movies jointly. As for why, Pixar wanted more money and Disney didn't want to lose profits.

Washington Post story covering this [washingtonpost.com]

Re:Adult films

[XMyth]

Mmmmmmm Pixar Porn......

But seriously, I think this is a good idea. Anime nerd or not (the only anime I like is Ronin Warriors, do I count?) a adult-oriented *good* cg movie would probably do good.

And no, Final Fantasy doesn't count because the story line was just plain boring. FF is good at gameplay not stories.

Maybe we could petition Pixar?

Re:Adult films

[bentini]

Because of the Final Fantasy CG movie.

Re:Adult films

[aborchers]

I wish I hadn't wasted all my mod points busting down FP trolls, because you've definitely earned a boost. Finding Nemo is one of the best films I've seen in recent years and I still see new things in it every time I watch it (which happens a lot because my two year old also loves it!)

I'm no G-Rated wuss when it comes to film taste either. I'm a big fan of Quentin Tarantino, Sam Raimi, and pre-LOTR Peter Jackson, for example. Nonetheless, Pixar can make the kind of movies they want to make and I wish them success at it because they make truly excellent films.

Tech?

[KaiserZoze_860]

Aside from the fact that this looks like it'd be just as funny as Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc... What are they running for web services - seriously?

The 2 trailers loaded extremely fast (on the main site) and the Flash loaded faster than I could click "Skip Intro." Over all, a very well made site.

Disney without Pixar is going to be like Apple without Steve Jobs... Oh, wait...

Stock position

[GPLDAN]

I don't care if they make films for kids, films for teens, films for old age home dwellers. I got in to Pixar in the summer of 2003 at $53/share. The rumors were already flying that trouble with Disney was brewing, but I thought they'd mend ways for a larger percentage. Instead, that bonehead Eisner cut them loose. He also cut Michael Moore's new film loose, even though that will also do huge business. Never let politics interfere with business, what a shmuck.

I just want these films to come out and be big, smash hits. So, when Pixar goes to Sony or somebody else for distro rights, they get a blockbuster deal and the stock shoots up to $80 or beyond. My $10k in should return well if that happens. I'll take 35% over two years, for my annualized rate of return, thank you very much.

Re:Adult films

[Black_Logic]

Admittedly, I haven't seen Finding Nemo. I understand what you're saying, as I said in my previous post, I recognize that they've got some really talented writers working for them. Clearly we're getting into a subjective debate here, but I'd really like to see a completely CG movie geared towards adults. For instance, a whole lot of sci-fi storys could be done extremely well in this medium. A lot people complain about the special effects in movies because they're not real enough. Nobody has ever complained about the special effects in a pixar movie not being real enough. There'd be much more freedom to have big environments that fit the atmosphere of the movie well. Suspended disbelief works so much better in a cartoon. At that would really help a sci-fi flick.

Re:They still ...

[Schnapple]

Also Disney gets the rights to any sequels for these films, if Pixar refuses to make sequels for them. (Like Toy Story 3)

But it's even more fun than that - Disney owns the rights to the characters in Toy Story, but Pixar owns the rights to the new characters introduced in Toy Story 2, so none of them will be in a Pixar-less Toy Story 3.

Also, does anyone else think it's odd from the trailer that it's like Pixar wants to disown A Bug's Life?

Teaser and new trainler look like two movies

[Sabalon]

I saw the teaser trailing a while ago on the Finding Nemo DVD. Looks hilarious - superhero coming out of retirement.

However this new trailer makes the movie look completely different - a superhero team all very much in the now.

Either way,it's PIXAR so I'll be seeing it and when the kids get the DVD, I'll be seeing it again and again. About the only thing that may make this different is the characters are people as opposed to talking animals and toys etc...

Superhero Interview

[SamSpectre]

The superhero interview 'bit' in the trailer looked like it was lifted straight from the The Tick animated series. *tap, tap, tap--is this thing on?* Now Pixar doing a Tick movie, THAT would be Great!

Pixar is no different than anyone else

[gosand]

No adult content? Go watch Pixar's movies again. They CLEARLY have written in content for adults in all of their movies. Pixar is obviosly gearing movies for mainstream, that involves children and adults. Why limit a movie to one crowd(adults or children)? The super success of Finding Nemo was BECAUSE it was aimed at children and adults.

I think you hit the nail on the head - but not how you intended. I love Pixar's movies, but they are clearly written for kids. Like you said, they WRITE IN CONTENT FOR ADULTS. I agree with the parent poster, that I would like to see a movie from Pixar where the adult content wasn't an afterthought. Think "Spirited Away". It is appropriate for adults and kids, but doesn't feel like a kids movie with a few jokes thrown in for the parents. Finding Nemo was good, but it was still a kids movie.

Sure, they are a kickass animation studio, but let's not forget that they make movies to MAKE MONEY. Where is the money? Product tie-ins. Granted, if the movie tanks their products sit on the shelves, so they do have to make a decent movie first. This has been the MO for kids moviemakers for quite a while now. It has been very obvious for a long time and is starting to become pathetic (Cat in the Hat anyone?). But parents lap it up. There is already Shrek 2 merchandise on the market.

Hey, that is the movie business, not much room for integrity.

Re:The Incredibles Soundtrack vs Die Another Day

[AceCaseOR]

Um... that piece of music you're thinking of, from the beginning of the trailer, that's "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" [imdb.com], from the movie of the same name. Still Bond, but different Bond film.

Re:What the???

[Mateito]

But for the Lion King 1-1/2 (which I haven't seen, so I won't comment), there's an Aladdin II... and an Alladin III.

My pet peeve with Disney is that they take stuff in the Public Domain (Cinderella etc) then start sending legal threats to anybody who does the same, claiming that they are cashing on the Disney investment. Of course, many claims are baseless, but who can defend themselves against the legal might of Disney?

The last straw was when they pulled out of the production of the recent "Peter Pan" movie, because they didn't want to pay royalties to the orphanage that owns the rights (they received them in the will of the Author).

Disney claims because they already paid once for their animated production of Peter Pan, they shouldn't have to pay again.

Hmm.. Billion dollar multinational refusing to give a tiny percentage of one fucking movie to a group of kids without parents. Walt would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't frozen into it.

Isn't this old?

[gkelman]

There was a trailer for The Incredibles in the cinema when Finding Nemo came out. It's also on the DVD.

And it's still 174 days until it comes out according to the website. Hurry up! I lost interest when the film didn't come out within a week of seeing the trailer. Stop tempting with things that are years away, damn you!

Re:What the???

[Gumshoe]

My pet peeve with Disney is that they take stuff in the Public Domain (Cinderella etc) then start sending legal threats to anybody who does the same, claiming that they are cashing on the Disney investment.

That's not strictly true. Disney have a reputation of legally threatening people over this sort of thing but it has nothing to do with protecting its investment. So long as you avoid using Disney inventions that were used in conjunction with the public domain story then Disney can't do a thing.

For example, it's perfectly legitimate for someone to stage a play based on Snow White but Disney would come down hard if you used the names and/or appearance of the Seven Dwarves as seen in the movie (the seven dwarves appear in the original public domain Snow White but the characters of Grumpy, Sleepy, et al, are Disney inventions and not in the public domain).

Is this right? Well, it's a strict and traditional application of copyright so it's difficult to complain about, unless you want to argue against copyright in general. What isn't right, and this relates to your original pet-peeve, is the retroactive extension of copyright so that the Disney inventions never fall into the public domain.

Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004"

[cmpalmer]

Well, I was going to flippantly comment that it is the correct numerical equivalent to writing out the date as, say, "November 5th, 2004", but then I realized that many (non-American) people write "5 November 2004". Do the the people who write it the latter way say "5 November" or "November 5th"?

Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else

[gosand]

Uhm...Miyazaki-san himself has said that he wrote Spirited Away for 12-year-old girls. You're confusing the cultural disconnect with audience. Granted, Japanese animated films in general tend to have a higher degree of maturity than American ones do...but that doesn't mean they're for an older audience.

Hmm. Didn't know that. Interesting though, how a movie written for a 12-year old girl in another country can seem so mature, while movies written for 12-year-olds in the US seem vapid and utterly childish. I plead ignorance on the cultural disconnect, but I am giving Miyazaki no more credit than he deserves. Spirited Away was a great movie, whereas Finding Nemo is a great kid's movie. For some reason, I find the need to qualify it.

Re:They still ...

[Schnapple]

Well it's more than that - in the Nemo trailers they didn't mention Bug's Life either. Perhaps Bug's Life is in that situation where it's both not their most recognized brand and it's also not their most recent bankable work. Too bad really.

Re:Adult films

[aborchers]

I'd certainly concur on the Toy Story films, but I can't say I was all that floored by Monsters Inc. You're definitely right that Nemo doesn't have the kind of character development that Toy Story does. I just thought it did an excellent job of packing in the adult-satisfying details (obscure marine science references, subtle references to the other films, etc.)

Re:Adult films

[Belgand]

Frankly Finding Nemo seemed so vapidly childish to me that I could be bothered to see it. A fish travels to find his missing son. *Yawn* I'm sure it might have had some adult-oriented content, but honestly most of what I saw in previews and such didn't really inspire me to have any interest that it would be much beyond the formulaic nature of such an enterprise.

One of the very, very few films that was successfully aimed at children and adults equally in my mind was The Princess Bride. Neither talking down to kids or adults it can be enjoyed by both at the exact same level for an entire lifetime.

What about "A Bug's Life"?

[mblase]

The trailer begins: "From the makers of 'Toy Story', 'Monsters, Inc.', and 'Finding Nemo'". It's like everybody forgot that "A Bug's Life" was released in there somewhere and made Pixar a ton of money as well. Yeah, I know it wasn't the success it could have been because "Antz" was released a month before, but still... surely Pixar believes they deserve some credit for it?

I dunno, maybe the fact that it's the only Pixar movie where the villain dies at the end is working against them, or something. I still think it's as good as any of Pixar's other outings, even if they don't.