comment #1

NYCBusybody says ...

The glut of computer-animated movies is finally starting to hurt Pixar. Nemo and the Toy Stories never had to deal with Ice Ages and Over the Hedges taking, what, $350 mil combined? in 3 months before their release.

Also, maybe its time people start to realize that Pixar movies kinda blow. Cars was actually a fairly good one, and The Incredibles was very good. But the Toy Storys were always overrated, and in fact, rather banal. As was Monster's Inc, and the less said about Finding Nemo, the better.

comment #2

jesse says ...

I'm a little puzzled by the relentless negative reporting against CARS over at Jim Hill Media. First, it doesn't seem to differentiate Pixar from Disney in the sense that they seem to be criticize Pixar as an extension of Disney. Second, and moreover, they're making a lot out of very little. When all is said and done, Pixar's big fumble will be a movie that opened to $60 million, made about $200 million, and got decent but not fantastic reviews. Where is the downside, except to show that not every Pixar movie is a lock for a $250 million-plus gross? I'd say a $200 million gross for CARS is spoonful of sugar to make that medicine go down.

*They "almost" lost the top spot to NACHO LIBRE. So NACHO opens bigger than expected (and still about five mil behind CARS), and somehow that's a danger sign?

*Who was initially projecting CARS to do over $300 million domestic?? Only one Pixar movie has ever done that, and I saw no indication that even the most opitimistic industry people were expecting CARS to reach FINDING NEMO numbers. INCREDIBLES/MONSTERS/TOY STORY 2, sure.

comment #3

lesterg says ...

"Pixar movies kind of blow", NYC?

Ok.

Exactly what animated films are BETTER than Pixar's output in the last decade? Seriously, I'm at a loss.

Hell, I didn't even like "A Bug's Life" or "Monsters, Inc" - but they're still superior to every animated film since "The Lion King".

comment #4

NYCBusybody says ...

I didn't say any animated films are better, lesterg, nor do I think there are any better.

Pixar are the pinnacle of animation, I'll grant that. Which means I think the state of animation is kinda sucky, that's all.

comment #5

NYCBusybody says ...

Actually, on second thought, I thought The Iron Giant and South Park movie were very good, better, in my opinion, than the best of Pixar (which would be The Incredibles, to me).

comment #6

Mathew says ...

Sadly this industry is all about neg-head publicity. Jeff falls for the bait too often (unless he really loves a film). To say that Cars will be a disappointment is really unfair.

First off, Cars is probably turning away some business because of the subject. The over fifteen crowd is probably thinking "this is a dumb cartoon about talking cars..." Where as The Incredibles had at least the notion of 'real' characters. Also don't forget the almighty 'female' factor. Truth is that cars are more of a boy thing at least until high school. So unlike Nemo which featured talking fish (cute and colorfull, perfect for the Rainbow Brite crowd) the market for 'Cars' is probably much smaller overall. With all that said a $200 million domestic gross can be considered a success.

comment #7

Dixon Steele says ...

The truth is, CARS is lesser Pixar. The first half was disappointing and the picture really only came alive at the end, for me anyway.

And frankly, I thought the trailers sucked. Which couldn't have helped the opening.

comment #8

Telemachos says ...

The quote is idiotic. Firstly, a low-40s drop is now pretty solid... most big movies these days drop over 50%. Sure, 43% is more than most Pixar movies, but most Pixar movies open just before Thanksgiving and have a huge holiday second weekend to boost their numbers. Is CARS tracking with NEMO's numbers? No, but I don't think anyone ever expected it to be a $300+ million grosser this summer.

CARS should comfortably cross the $200 million mark... it'll be around $150 after this weekend with a summer of weekdays left. Even if its legs are only OK, it should be able to comfortably pass $200. Why does this Disney dude think that somehow SUPERMAN will rob CARS of *all* its audience? The two films aren't exactly hitting the same demographic.

comment #9

NYCBusybody says ...

Yeah, I thought Nemo was too cute and bubbly - look at all the faaabulous! colors.

I prefer Cars. I like cars. Cars go vroom.

comment #10

NYCBusybody says ...

Honestly, doesn't anyone else think Jeffrey reports far too much on boxoffice numbers/predictions/tracking/results/analysis? Isn't this a guy who always raves against box-office culture?

comment #11

Todd says ...

Personally I thought Over the Hedge was a very entertaining movie far better than the crappy Cars movie. But it still seems a fair amount of the animated movie going public are drawn to the Disney/Pixar brand. Most funny idea in these post is the idea of a studio making hundreds of millions of dollars isn't good enough.

comment #12

vik says ...

NYC said it first- market saturation. There is a finite amount of money to be made by CG animated kids movies. Pixar had the market to themselves, but when there's money to be made, every studio executive thinks he can take some animals, a slap-dash story, throw in some well known actors for VO, and make $300 million. Well, they're finally starting to lose money, just like any genre will once you beat the formula to death.
No one at Disney- or anyone else- should be surprised by this. They did the exact same thing to hand-drawn animation after the lion king.

Now it's up to Pixar to do something inventive, and up to Disney to have the balls to greenlight it.

comment #13

lesterg says ...

Even if Cars does underperform, it's not like it's crisis time. All of this is going to be forgotten by the time Toy Story 3 demolishes records in '08 or '09. Pixar will be fine.

comment #14

NYCBusybody says ...

As much as I hate to say it, Shrek completely owns Pixar. Hell, Toy Story ($197M) and Toy Story 2 ($246M) COMBINED equal the grosses of Shrek 2 in the U.S. (yes, that doesn't include inflation of ticket prices, but still). The Toy Stories aren't even remotely close to as popular as the Shreks. Pixar hasn't been invincible for quite awhile already.

comment #15

lesterg says ...

Ouch - I completely forgot about Shrek. That record isn't going away anytime in the near future.

comment #16

Daniel Zelter says ...

"This time around, the competition is just too strong."

Yeah, the competition. THAT'S the reason for underperforming.

Could it be the NASCAR angle to the story that has scared away millions of car-hating audience members?

The laziness of the plot?

That the film just isn't that good?

Not to Disney - the reason it's failing is the competition. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

I asked around my gay chorus about the film, and NOBODY wanted to see it.

comment #17

jse says ...

Let's not forget, that Cars was playing on over 900 more screens than Nacho Libre and still barely held the #1 spot.

comment #18

Zac says ...

Listening to Jim Hill Media "reporting" about Cars or anything related to the Disney company is like listening to Fox News "reporting" about left-wing issues.

Completely slanted and totally biased. Read about 2 months' worth of "news" there and you'll get it. Not sure why anyone takes that site seriously.

comment #19

zoey says ...

Who wants to see animated CARS? How cute and cuddly are CARS? How interesting to watch are CARS? (No climbing, skating, running, jumping, dancing... Only racing, racing, and more racing.) And how visually captivating are CARS? Hey, there's no way they come close to an emoting Shrek or a Woody or, my own favorite, a Mr. Potato Head. I just don't get it.

comment #20

BL says ...

I must admit - I think the Pixar people are as close to geniuses as anybody out there (that chase scene with the fast-running kid in "The Incredibles" still blows my mind) - but something about cars as characters leaves me totally cold, personally. Placing the eyes in the dashboards seems especially lame - as if to say 'yeah, it is stupid to put eyes in the dashboard, but what other option do we have'?

Oh well - they had a pretty good run and were due for a semi-clinker. If I had been working in the company I would have ignored my gut with the thought that this was a solid commercial idea and would have green-lighted it (and yes,all those car puns were completely coincidental).

comment #21

Dan R% says ...

I took my sis to it. She's ten. She was bored at parts. She'd rather have been watching Superman or Pirates.
I thought it was okay at parts, but it definitely is a clunker.

comment #22

Telemachos says ...

Of course, I'm sure many studios/production companies would love to have a stinker like CARS -- a weak little runt that will only pull in $200 million domestic, $350 million worldwide, and be endlessly sell-able on home video.

comment #23

Bob says ...

There's no great secret going on here. The movie isn't that good. The main character has no depth or backstory to him, the lesson is more-or-less a trite repetition of Toy Story 2, etc.

Unfortunately, when you're as good as Pixar you're first big drop in quality is going to be labeled a disaster instead of a dissapointment, and if they're smart they should have been bracing for this since "Incredibles" came out: That film was an absolute masterstroke of genius, and ANYTHING that came next was going to look lesser by comparison.

comment #24

Daniel Zelter says ...

lester: "Exactly what animated films are BETTER than Pixar's output in the last decade? "

Millennium Actress, Memories, Spirited Away, Princess Mononoke, Metropolis, what NYCBusybody said...

" All of this is going to be forgotten by the time Toy Story 3 demolishes records in '08 or '09."

Toy Story had the convenience of being made back when kids still played with toys. Now they play with videogames. I'm not sure if the franchise will still have the same impact it once did in that regard.

Fake Daniel Zelter: The reason Cars failed is the same reason all of Disney's 2-d films post-Lion King failed. They released one every year, and audiences just got tired of the formula. It diminishes the appeal of the company name.

comment #25

lesterg says ...

Daniel: Millennium Actress, Memories, Spirited Away, Princess Mononoke, Metropolis, what NYCBusybody said...

Sorry, I should have said EXCLUDING foreign animated films that most people only pretend to like. Just kidding. We'll make this about American-produced animation.

Daniel Zelter: Toy Story had the convenience of being made back when kids still played with toys. Now they play with videogames. I'm not sure if the franchise will still have the same impact it once did in that regard.

As far as I can recall: the Sony Playstation, Sega Genesis, Sega Saturn, Super Nintendo and Gameboy were all going strong the year Toy Story was released. Many of those same systems (along with the Nintendo 64 and Dreamcast) were also on the market when Toy Story 2 came out. There are still thousands of toy stores from coast to coast as of this morning. What am I missing in your argument?

If you're talking about the specific children who enjoyed the films in 1995 and 1999 - of course most are no longer playing with toys.

However, it's like saying there's no audience for Shrek 3 because the kids who enjoyed the original in the theater are now in middle school.

New, young audience members are recruited every day by DVD/cable. One generation grows up and another takes its place. Just go to any Disney store on a weekend and see how many young kids (most of whom weren't even born when the last film was released) are buying movies/dolls/toys, etc. They are modern classics.

comment #26

Rogo says ...

My son's ten. His fav flick is Mononoke... and this year there's nothing bigger than Pirates II. Cars totally left him cold. ZERO interest. His words (based on trailers and synopsis): looks like a lame Disney pic. Which it is. The boring pretentious Disney formula. Really it is. A hero, a sidekick, a bad guy, flashy colours. Even if it's animated and from pixar it still plays safe using the formula.

comment #27

Rogo says ...

Oh. Pirates is, of course, a Disney flick, too. But somehow it feels way different right from the start (or well trailers)

comment #28

Rich says ...

People, people. Have we all forgotten the wisdom of Yogurt from Spaceballs? It's almost beside the point how well these films do. It's all about corporate synergy. Yes, Shrek II is the all-time highest grossing animated film. Yes, it outgrossed Toy Story I and II combined. But how many action figures did it sell? How many theme park rides did it inspire? How many kids want Shrek bedsheets? Shrek has sold all these things, but, on the whole Toy Story (and the rest of the Pixar canon) has buried it.

Cars (like Pirates and The Incredibles) targets a segment that Disney has trouble reaching: preteen boys. Pixar is so successful because it creates these properties without insulting its audience (or their parents). Walt would be proud.

comment #29

Daniel Zelter says ...

lester: "As far as I can recall: the Sony Playstation, Sega Genesis, Sega Saturn, Super Nintendo and Gameboy were all going strong the year Toy Story was released. Many of those same systems (along with the Nintendo 64 and Dreamcast) were also on the market when Toy Story 2 came out. There are still thousands of toy stores from coast to coast as of this morning. What am I missing in your argument?"

But gaming was still a niche phenomenon when those systems were out, and now it's a multi-billion dollar industry. Hollywood execs have admitted that part of the slump can be attributed to today's youth being more interested in games than their films.

"However, it's like saying there's no audience for Shrek 3 because the kids who enjoyed the original in the theater are now in middle school."

There's a difference between ten years between films and three years between them. But I think that the disappointing dvd sales for Shrek 2 indicate that the franchise has peaked. It should still make money, but nowhere near as much as the first two installments.

"New, young audience members are recruited every day by DVD/cable. One generation grows up and another takes its place. Just go to any Disney store on a weekend and see how many young kids (most of whom weren't even born when the last film was released) are buying movies/dolls/toys, etc."

Actually, the company under Eisner recently shut down some of their stores, due to low sales. I think the one on Hollywood got semi-converted into an ice cream parlour.