As Schaffrillas said before " Illumination makes sequels for money, Sony makes sequels for money, Disney and Pixar make sequels for money. DreamWorks makes sequels for art. "
@@SemmieWNT well that's the sad part if someone makes good money they overusing it and won't care except the money I mean it's called Money ruins character
Incredibles 2 should have done a time jump and age the characters like How to Train Your Dragon 2 did. Dash, Violet and Jack Jack are grown up now. Bob and Helen are now retired. The main character could have been Jack Jack coming to terms with himself. The story may not sound as original as the first one that dealt with a superhero's midlife crisis, but it's at least something.
It also would have made the technology and social jump way more believable. The first Incredibles had the time period maybe a few decades before 2000 or around that time, which you can tell by Bob’s car, the city look, the lack of high technology, etc. However, I2 just seemed way too modern and tech savy for taking place literally a few minutes from the end of I1. The time jump would have also allowed the family to develop a new dynamic, introduce new things more easily, and give Pixar/Disney more leeway in filling that time skip out later. Like HTTYD 2 takes place about 5 years from the first one, and DreamWorks later went in and filled it with the shows and shorts to expand the world. It doesn’t detract from the movies, but gives the crews a time frame and boundaries to explore concepts and ideas that would later be reflected in the movies. Like, we see that Hiccup developed his flight suit in HTTYD2 and because of the time skip, we didn’t really question “why does he have this?” It was more like “neat! He must have been tinkering with that for a while to make it work.” Race to the Edge then shows the progress of the flight suit progression, which fans can enjoy if they’re really interested in knowing. But even without that, the flight suit still works on its own in HTTYD2.
@@jendoe9436 Since the first movie took place in the 60s, they could have made a time jump into the 70s. Have Violet and Dash be in their 20s and being full-time superheroes while Jack-Jack deals with being in school and Bob and Helen are enjoying retirement.
Violet dating a non-super and being unsure when to tell him about her powers, balancing her super life with her normal one (and getting help by Lucius and his wife too) Dash, while nothing out of note, meets other supers his age but also makes a friend of a genius non-super Jack-Jack have issues controlling his powers as an emotional kid And Bob accepting that his days as a super are over while Helen has to live with the fact that her kids are leaving the nest This being around the time when the legal process around getting supers back wasn't full in motion yet - they could, but there is no support from the government yet. The villain in this case would be another extreme of a fan from the first movie, some guy who wants to make supers legal and thus wreaks havoc His reason being that he wants to make people realize that they need to depend on supers because their own police and firemen and what not can't always help them. This would be an interesting conflict - where we have non-supers in the incredibles lives, helping them and proving that you don't need powers to do good or (help) rescue the world. Basically end this whole "God like image" of the supers from the first movie, where normal people are portrayed as incompetent or helpless mostly. Instead, they work all together. Edit: the movie would end with politicians re-establishing that heroes can work again - difference to before is that they would be not supported by the state or police, we wouldn't have police interact with them like they're part of the team like in the first movie.
Idk, Jack Jack is pretty boring character and we don't need _another_ Dysney princess story about finding yourself. People love the whole family and movie about whole family fighting together against crimes would be great.
The difference between the Disney/Pixar sequels and Dreamworks sequels is that if Dreamworks creates a bad sequel, it doesn't have much effect on the whole franchise. Just like Shrek 3 which you can totally ignore the film and nothing will happen to the whole franchise. Whereas for the Disney, those bad sequels can also effect the first films and undermine the whole massage of the franchise. Just look at toy story 4 and Ralph breaks the internet. They ruin the whole message and theme of the franchise, thus I can never look at these franchises the same.
You know Shrek the Third is bad when even Shrek Forever After ignores the film other than Shrek and Fiona’s kids. We don’t even see Arthur in the third film despite becoming the new king of Far Far Away.
@@diegosanchez5412 Monster's University has the same problem most pixar sequels have Where it completely disregards the original, the arcs in it, and the lore. So if you're a die-hard fan of the OG it feels extremely disappointing Also the fact that it plays every single cliche from a college movie straight with not an ounce of self awareness made it a hard watch
I hate how Pixar seems so cash grabby now. Like, I know they're a business, and earning money is important, but in the 2000s, they seemed to be a humble studio full of people who loved to tell stories and were proud of the legacy they were creating for themselves. And now, it just seems like all they care about is taking familiar characters that we love and just sticking them on to recycled plots in sequels that aren't necessary, or don't measure up to the original.
I’ve heard that once Disney got involved they demanded more sequels. However, if it is Pixar’s independent decision then they really don’t have an excuse. Their originals were all extremely successful. I guess it takes more time and effort to come up with a new concept and doing that is difficult when you need to make a film each year.
@@emiliano_rm2006 Yeah, Steve Jobs was really against Disney buying Pixar out. They were just partners all the way up to Up. TS3 was their first official Disney owned release. Disney also used their animators to render stuff for their own films (Frozen). I think Jobs was protecting the integrity of Pixar really well and whenever he got ill, his efforts and wishes weren't respected. I used to adore this studio and now I mildly keep up with their releases.
@@emiliano_rm2006 I don't get it? If the sequel ends up being good, isn't it all that matters? It has nothing to do with just wanting money if they put real effort to it.
I'm inexplicably fond of Monsters University despite its weaknesses, it's just a fun watch. And I love Finding Dory, parts of it hit so close to home I was crying in the theater; also we got introduced to Gerald, who is very relatable more often than not.
The messages and themes in Monsters university about inadequacy and rising above personal factors you were born with (Mike not being scary) to achieve your goals are great and really affected me when I saw it the first time. They should've focused on that sentiment and built it up better over the course of the movie, which would've made the climax way more compelling instead of the random scare games stuff. I feel like the movie would've been better received as a subversive masterpiece like Megamind if it just focused on what was really important regarding the characters instead of having some side adventure.
Yeah monster's university was a comfort film for me lmao. Like I dunno why but every single time I feel ill or very anxious I put it on. There's just something about it that's so comforting.
The biggest problem with the Disney/Pixar sequels is that they really have nothing to say that expand the story as well as the original....with the exception of Toy Story 2 and 3, non of these sequels give us anything really new.....there are minor things these films does well, like I love Monsters University last Scare in the real world, but the film itself is pointless, specially, knowing the story of Monsters Inc. and this is a problem in most of their sequels.........I like Incredibles 2, love the action sequences with Elastic girl, but the overall story and conflict is just a repeat of the first one but with Helen as the protagonist instead of Bob and a lackluster excuse of a villain compared to the incredible (no pun intended XD) Syndrome. Not get me start on Disneys sequels like Frozen 2, the godawful Ralphs Breaks the Internet and the countless lifeless direct to DVD sequels (with a few veryyyy few exceptions).....when you see in the other side of the fence with Dreamworks is the total opposite......their sequels absolutely expand the story and characters making the world feel bigger and better, with amazing sequels like Shreak 2, forever after, Kung Fu Panda 2 and 3, How to Train your Dragon 2 and 3 and recently Puss in Boots the Last Wish, not only the sequels are good, they rival the original if not SURPASS THEM, as they should. Overall I rather Disney stop making sequels, there was a reason why Walt Disney himself never tried that and for the longest the company respected that, until that era of straight to DVD and in some cases most of us ignored all those films as non canon, but now is impossible with Frozen 2 and Ralphs Break the Internet and that is just sad.
@@PakoVero Opinions on Forever After have been mixed. A lot of people think it's as bad as Shrek the Third, while others think it doesn't deserve the hate.
I pray to God that one is the ONLY good thing that'll come out of them for this generation. I don't want to see the potential broken for that type of sequel... my heart won't take that💀
@@youngspecial64 Yeah, my worry is that Nick and Judy will get separated in a really forced way. Frozen 2 did it. Wreck It Ralph 2 did it. Toy Story 4 did it.
@@PlanetZoidstar The anger within my *VEINS* if that happens... but i have to keep a level head and have some faith that they won't mess this up towards unpairable damage. That's all any of us can do, at this point.
@@youngspecial64 Exactly, Zootopia was built on the bond that Judy and Nick grew through their adventure. If the sequel breaks them apart for some bullshit reason, it will just invalidate the first movie completely. What I want to see? I want them to go all-in and have Nick and Judy get engaged at the end of the movie. I want Zootopia 2 to be about them trying to make a relationship work in a Zootopia that, while it's ready to treat Predators as equals to Prey, they're not ready to validate a Predator/Prey relationship. Then have Zootopia 3 end with them getting married and having kids. Adopted or interspecies, just it would put a wholesome bow on their relationship. They're clearly into eachother.
About Toy Story 4, it really was a terrible sequel in a pretty coat of paint. Like, Bonnie very CLEARY still plays with Woody and enjoys playing with him DURING THE MOVIE.
@@dollfairytopia Well, whether you like it or not, she still cared about Woody. If she didn't care, she would've left him on the sidewalk and only play with Forky.
Dreamworks has no problem with making sequels even when there is a big gap between the last release. They announced Kung Fu Panda 4 for the 2024 release meanwhile Kung Fu Panda 3 came out in 2016. That's an 8-year wait while the original trilogy had about two 4-year gaps between installments. Between the original Puss in Boots and its sequel passed almost 12 years. Puss in Boots 2 also foreshadowed a potential sequel to the Shrek franchise for which the last movie was Shrek Forever After in 2010. The Croods came out in 2013, and its sequel The Croods: New Age came out in 2020. Again with huge positive critical and box office reception. $216 million from a $65 million budget. Dreamworks is the master of sequels! Disney and Pixar sequels feel like cash grabs.
@@SuperPlacido1 most Pixar sequel are cash grabs (except for Cars 3), they just feel more like cash grab copy of their predecessor, especially The Incredibles 2, while all Dreamworks sequels work because they are bold and have more thoughts put into them (except for Shrek : The Third from 2010)
@@curious5887 You forgot Troll 2! This is another sequel crap by Dreamworks! Pixar sequels are excellent! You can not say Toy Story 2 & 3 are shit! Even The Incredibles 2 is great! I want a sequel for Luca! Luca was an excellent movie!
@@SuperPlacido1 Incredibles 2 was great? Now that's a laugh. Dreamworks has way more good sequels under their belt than Disney and Pixar combined (I mean, they only got 2 good sequels, so obviously).
I’d still rather watch a sequel or prequel than a remake. With regards to Lightyear, despite what it says at the beginning of the film, I think it’s more likely that Andy watched the Buzz Lightyear of Star Command series as a kid, and Lightyear is the dark and gritty reboot aimed at capitalising on adult Andy’s nostalgia for the TV show.
On a related note, they should have just given us a Lion King 3, instead of a live-action remake of The Lion King. Simba's pride and 1 1/2 were great sequels even if they didn't live up to the original. At this point I'm really worried about the live-action Lion King prequel, Mufasa.
I was momentarily confused at first, cause in some countries, Lion King 1 1/2 is called Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata. I'm not sure I care enough to be worried about the Mufasa prequel.
@@richardblakely6854 Why'd they called 1 1/2 "TLK3"? Even though Timon in the preview removed the three and changed it to "1 1/2". As both Timon and Pumbaa agreed that it wasn't even a sequel, but a midquel instead.
What really made the first Incredibles special was that it was a parody/subversion of classic super hero tropes. Super Heroes being sued, being blamed for the collateral damage they caused, being banned and having to get their Hero kicks surreptitiously, making fun of capes, villains monologing etc all this within a family dynamic is what made it really clever. All gone in the sequel.
Not related, but I sadly felt the same way about Desenchanted - the first one served as a sort of parody/subverted troupes, while the second just threw everything out the window. Heck even the animation was different. I know animation is hard, I study it, but you'd think Disney, who started as an ANIMATION company, would release a movie with animation that's at least identical to the original - instead of it feeling lifeless and janky in certain scenes.
The main problem is that almost none of their sequels continue the story, they just rehash plot elements from the original films. The big example being Incredibles 2 resetting everything that was resolved in the first film and repeating the plot but worse. The only franchises that actually tell new stories with each film are Toy Story and, shockingly, Cars. Another issue is that despite these sequels coming more than a decade after the original films, no time actually passes between movies. Toy Story helps illustrate the problem. Toy story 1 and 2 have a two year time gap between them that is reflected in the movies. Toy story 3 came out more than a decade later and that is incorporated into the movie, we feel that Andy has grown up with us. But then Toy Story 4 came out 9 years after the last sequel but it's only been a year in-universe? Why don't we get to see Bonnie grow up like we did with Andy? Because now the priority is making sure these characters are recognisable so people who remember their childhoods will buy a ticket. Jack-Jack must stay a baby, Violet must always be an anxious teenager, and Dash must always be a rascally little boy. It just feels fake. Again, ironically, Cars is the only franchise without this issue. Between every movie, time is shown to pass and that's cool.
You can also apply the "rehashing" to Toy Story 4 too. The main characters have completely different personalities contrary to the ones they used to have in Toy Story 1, 2 and 3. The plot is Woody wanting to find someone new because "Bonnie doesn't play with him". Despite being played with in the movie itself. The plot is fundamentally broken and the logic thats established is broken too.
@@Simbala-bq5vy They really should have given us a Lion King 3 instead of a live-action remake. That remake was horrible. And I'm truly worried about the live-action Lion king prequel, mufasa.
I remember being beyond obsessed with Cars 2 when I was five. I was constantly reenacting the opening scene with my toys and I think it was my one of my favorite movies ever. I have never loved a movie like that in a long time.
But we don't have to depend on them anymore if they lost themselves. We have people like Dreamworks on the scene in creating good animated films again, showing that they're still there to pick up the slack that we've been dealing with throughout all these years. And there are other studios as well, like the people who are creating across the spider-verse and that teenage mutant ninja turtles movie.
@@alphonsejohnson5601 yeah, and Cinderella 3 was also great. But those are 3 good movies out of 26 direct-to-video sequels man. Same thing with Disney's new cash grab tactic that is live action remakes, there were some decent ones, but overral it is horrible
I always wondered why we never got a sequel for those three Pixar movies that I consider the "Golden Back-to-Backs" [Ratatouille, Wall-E, and UP], yet now I understand why. Ratatouille's ending perfectly shows that Remy got what he wanted in life and everybody is happy. Wall-E's ending shows that humanity returned to Earth to change it for the better and Wall-E and Eve got their happy ending. UP's ending shows that Carl fulfilled the promise he made to Ellie all those years ago and Russel was able to finally become a Senior Wilderness Explorer, plus Doug was able to find his true master, giving them their happy ending. These movies are perfect and don't need sequels. Plus, the only good sequels we've seen are Toy Story 2 and 3 [And Monster's University, but that's a prequel so it doesn't really count]. So if we did, they most likely would be pretty terrible...
Cars 2 is a fun movie to watch with friends. I watched it with my friends from marching band in high school before we all left for college and it was too funny. But on a serious note I'm in the camp that the movie wouldn't have been as hated if it was called Mater's Tall Tales the movie or something rather than Cars 2
TRUE I agree that it probably should of been just called Mater's Tall Tales : The Movie Especially when Cars 3 feels like an actual sequel to the first one, in which if you remove cars 2 you wouldn't know at all that it was missing.
@@UltimateTS64 i feel like we needed a movie about McQueen an Mater's friensmdship and more of Mater as a friend. And while I kind of agree I just don't get how the hell the name of a movie should be a reason to think of it any differently. Call me crazy but I think being petty is one of the biggest problems in the world.
I think you need to rewatch the entire Toy Story series again and then tell me with a straight face that Toy Story 4 does not ruin the entire story and make every character into a shell of their former selves.
Yep, Toy Story 4 (and the upcoming 5th movie) are nothing by soulless cashgrabs from Disney. The story is so shallow, I could stand in a puddle of it and not get my feet wet. Also reads like really bad fanfiction, where all the characters have to be eviscerated in order for the plot to make sense.
@@adityagandhi9882 I think the point is that Woody can enjoy his new life without goodbyes. I mean, distance has never stopped him from meeting Buzz and the gang again. You can't say you abandon your family when you move out and live your life with your partner. I'd much rather do that than being around my family just being there with no purpose in life.
Sequels aren’t just a money making opportunity. They’re also an exercise for creators to both revisit and expand the world of the previous film(s) with a new installment. It ultimately affects different camps of the fandom in different ways.
The difference between pixar and dreamworks is their movie. Pixar tends to create a story that focus on one movie and one ending, while dreamworks always prepares for expanding their franchise. For example, Up, Coco, Wall e are movies which have the beginning and ending in one movie, like Carl lost his wife and began journey to full fill her dream, and at the end he learnt to live for new life and stop living in the past. Meanwhile when we watch httyd, the ending of the first movie is about Hiccup lived with the dragons. The ending of the first films could be expanded more about to keep living with the dragons. And at the last movie, we see that living with dragons could effect to their dragons life.
I think the monotony of the majority of Pixar sequels just show how well made the original stories where. None of this sequels beside the Toy Story franchise seemed like they wanted to make them, more like petitions by Disney to sell merch.
Idk why people hate on the Toy Story sequels. Each one is great and holds its own weight in my opinion. The dynamic of Andy and Woody has evolved so much that Woody is now a Toy without a purpose. He’s an old stuffed Cowboy with a pull string. Kids want modern things and Woody’s old now. 1 was the new favorite toy dilemma, 2 was clearing out the old toys, yard sale and change, 3 was the growth of Andy and saying goodbye to his toys, 4 was Woody saying goodbye to his friends because he’s useless without Andy. So you’re wrong, it all does come full circle back to Andy. Without Andy, Woody lost his purpose and had to move on with other “lost toys”. Id love to see the 5th tackle the new generation era problems. Like kids playing with Phones and video games and not needing toys at all anymore.. Getting pushed to the side again by the new new
Except woody is a toy with purpose. They went over this in Toy Story 2 with Jessie. Unless you’ve never seen that movie. Saying it came full Circle doesn’t work, when it came full circle in 3 with woody and Andy separating. Woody didn’t need to find purpose because his character was never about that. It was about making his owners happy. Something that again, Toy Story 2 already touched upon. If anything, it makes more sense for Jessie to be a lost toy than woodys. Because her owner already left her and she wouldn’t have any purpose more than woody, because she was given up once again
I've always said this but Incredibles 2 should've stuck with the family but had them evolved more. Instead of "it's ladies night" have Dash still with Elastigirl and create a mother/son dynamic with having Dash "slow down" learning to use his head more and Elastigirl "Keep up" with her son and getting back to being a super.
Instead of Cars 2, it would've been better if it was a spy cars spinoff movie with Finn Mcmissle as the main character. Or maybe just have a completely original Pixar spy movie with a human main character who is a secret agent and happens to drive a talking car that's a mix of KITT from Knight Rider and the Aston Martin from James Bond.
I think a problem not enough people bring up is the animation itself. The animation quality itself isn't bad per-say, in fact it's just as good as ever. But at the same time however, I feel like it's reached a point where Pixar's approach to animation and HOW they use it for their films is fundamentally flawed. Especially with the sequels. While technically they look way better than the originals, in some ways they also look WORSE if you really think about it. And in a lot of ways, pretty animation with barely any substance is just another contributing factor as to why most Pixar sequels fail. Even with the advancements in lighting, cloth details, the works, the final result in a lot of Pixar's recent films look like the same damn movie with little to no variation in the core aesthetic and lighting choices. It's pretty much just "the first movie's animation again but with more prettier colors and detailed lighting". They literally feel like tech demos with a half-assed story written last minute, might I add. Not only that, but there's even some parts of presentation where they completely forgot why certain elements looked the way they did before (outside of the tech being limited at the time). To further illustrate this point, look at the lighting in both Incredibles movies and you'll see a massive difference visually. One's got an artistic purpose that contributes to the film's story and tone, and the other's just a glorified saturday morning cartoon made to look pretty on the big screen. Do the same for all other pixar sequels after TS3 and you'll see the pattern. What's that pattern? Pixar's too focused on flexing their technical muscles while also forgetting good storytelling and artistic choices that made the originals work.
I think the greatest example of what you just said has been in their recent work, most notably Soul. I wonder how much better the animation would have been if it were stylized instead of 3D realism where the characters don't look realistic. Even if they did their first 2D with soul i think it would have worked better. But that movie had so much creative potential that I feel it got held back by its pixar approach to animation.
Look, people. Just move over to dreamworks and other studios and ignore whatever the hell disney is doing. They're going to keep producing garbage if they don't want to change, so let's just flat out abandon them like how they abandoned their touch on good animated films and crap in general. *It's as simple as that.*
Maybe that's what Disney needs. They need to start losing money every time they make something bad so they can see what the public doesn't like and they can make more good stuff and, in turn, more money.
@@elijahcandage Yup... the literal definition of their consequence on producing garbage after nonsense within a yearly bases with no depth, passion, or any creative vision. Just one small push, and they can truly be disciplined and learn the error of their ways. *"All it takes is a little PUSH"*
FINALLY I thought I was going crazy when I thought I was the only one who thought that Toy Story 4 wasn't that good of a sequel, because it kind of destroyed the importance of Woody to Bonnie, thus kind of destroying the ending of 3.
I used to love TOY STORY 3 until it was pointed out to me that it’s the exact same movie as TOY STORY 2. The toys are separated from Andy and placed into a new, dangerous real-world environment where a seemingly friendly Southern+chubby old man toy who leads the group ends up being the antagonist who’s bitter about being abandoned by his previous owner and a conflict ensues to escape. It’s really astonishing how widely overlooked this is. It’s so similar, it’s ridiculous.
You could easily say that for the first film as well, Woody (although not chubby or old looking) was seemingly nice before Buzz came around and then he turned antagonistic once he was worried about being replaced since Andy was playing with Buzz more. This was established in the final act of Woody's evil scheme by "accidentally" pushing Buzz out of the window as a way of getting rid of Buzz, now making the other toys think he did it on purpose since he spoke harshly of Buzz and they all turn on him. Woody and Buzz end up both separated from Andy and end up having to survive through wacky antics like Sid using them as test subjects and Pizza Planet. It's been the plot of the Toy Story franchise since day one.
I don't think it's the story per se, I truly believe Disney and Pixar lose the vibe and charm of each franchise somehow with their newer films. It's like they don't understand the previous film(s) wherein DreamWorks/Illumination do. Not all the sequels of the latter studios are great, but they seem to keep the vibe and characters consistent. Disney and Pixar's are awkward and it feels like they don't know the characters when they come back. It's off-putting and cheesy and that's why I don't like them. They try too hard when maybe they should just do a fun adventure with them without ruining the characters to make some kind of artsy statement that doesn't make sense for them.
I'll be real with you,I don't think Toy Story 4 is a "great movie" besides the fact about it added no real value, Bopeep treated Woody like an absolute jerk and yet Woody abandoned his whole family and Bonnie for Bopeep. Also Woody got sad because Bonnie didn't play with him for a whole 3 days which in that same third day of no playing, there's a scene with Bonnie playing with Woody and Forky and that's even more BS because that means Woody abandoned Bonnie because of 2 days with no playing, Hell Woody promised Buzz at the end of Toy Story 2 that he wouldn't leave Buzz's side even after being done played with Andie for good. And for more inconsistency Buzz was made out to be a smart intelligent problem solver but for some reason they degraded him in Toy Story 4 by making him some babbling dumbass who just presses his chest buttons just to figure out problems, The movie advertises that the whole original Toy Story cast that you've grown up with will take a large role in the movie when they only sit on their asses in a car for most of it. I'm just sharing my opinion that if I will be honest,Toy Story 4 is one of, if not the most horrible Pixar movie of all. The characters are ruined,the plot is inconsistent,theres too many coincidences that lead the toys to progress through the plot and the only thing that has this movie running barely is it's music and visuals but visuals and music doesn't make a movie good,if the plot isn't stable in any compacity then the movie shouldn't be given the role of great. But that's just my thoughts.
Woody and Buzz are degraded into utter buffons in order to make Bo and Gabby into #GirlBosses. It's the only reason why Bo's dress was redesigned to be soft material instead of porcelain, why she's suddenly hyper competent and able to parkour her way arround the playback. It's also why Woody gave away his voice box to Gabby, so she could get what she wanted. Like she was thr villian on the movie and she gets what she wants in the end ffs. >.>
@@BrightWulph I was shocked when I saw how BoPeep's face was "redesigned and updated" - Disney really wanted to slide in the fact that Pixar is theirs' by giving BoPeep the 'Elsa face' treatment - don't get me started on her retconned personality 🙄
@@jessoliveiro8975 Oh yeah, don't think I didn't notice Bo being given Elsa's face. ISTG, if it's not on purpose or trying to make the design more "appealing" for toy marketing, I sware that Disney is starting to suffer from same-face syndrome. Like all of their characters have to look the same. XO
Couldn't agree more, when I first saw the movie's ending, I was upset. Not because it was sad to see Woody and Buzz separate, but because Woody and Buzz separating ruined Woody's whole character. Everything you mentioned I totally agree with, 100% I can't even enjoy Toy Story 4 as a movie because it takes place after when the series had an intended conclusion.
I fully agree about Buzz but don’t entirely agree about Woody. He still cared about Bonnie and did everything to make her happy by helping her create Forky and making Forky stick around. Hell, he risked his life and sacrificed his voice box (which made him a lot less desirable as a toy to kids) to get him back for her before he left because his job was done. He could either spend the next few years gathering dust in a closet while being depressed and having no purpose or stay with his old girlfriend who clearly missed him (but kinda sucked sometimes) and can help lost toys find owners. At the end of the day, he could never recapture that passion for being an owned toy like he was with Andy and I like the old man miserable Woody we got in 4. They even reference the fact that he’s been around since the 50’s.
In actuality, Bonnie was just going through a phase with Woody. When she really wanted him from Andy, it was because Woody was a brand new aspect of imagination for her. But after a while, she became bored with Woody, rather quickly. Something, all youths tend to do.
I feel like Toy Story 5 will be cancelled unless they have a really amazing idea because people keep complaining? Yes I thought that toy story 4 was a good ending, but I was thrilled for more Toy Story.
I will never shut up about this but lightyear seems like a film Andy would see with his gf/wife and go "Eh I like the original better" and leave the theater ashamed.
I guess Disney and Pixar's approach to sequels can be summed up by this quote by the crab man himself, Schaffrillas Productions: "Disney makes sequels for money. Pixar makes sequels for money. DreamWorks makes sequels for ART."
Same. I consider Cars 2 to be the best Cars movie while I consider Cars 3 to be the weakest Cars movie. Cars 3 isn’t bad, it’s just weak compared to the other 2.
Cars 2 for me is a guilty pleasure. At least they tried to be unique and the movie is quite fun if u shut down your brain. But if there's something I would say, it definitely has more soul than most sequels lately.
My issue with Incredibles 2 was the villain's backstory. Her father had a phone, which could contact the heroes, outside his safe room. When the house was being burglarized, he went to his safe room. He left the safe room to call the heroes, only to be murdered. This resulted in the villain wanting all superheroes to disappear... It's not the murderer's fault for killing the father, it's the hero's fault because the father wanted to call them...
I kinda disagree with Cars 3 here, but I agree that Toy Story 4 and The Incredibles 2 are terrible, and don't get me started with Toy Story 5, i think it's pointless to make more Toy Story film at this point
@@SuperPlacido1 nah, Toy Story 4 is just a cash grab, well, technically all sequel are cash grab but good sequel like Cars 3, Terminator 2, Top Gun Maverick have lots of thought and care put into it, so that's why those sequel aren't called cash grab because they are made with high level of care and thoughts, Toy Story 4 on the other hand is just a cash grab from the start, because when 2018 started, Pixar began to lose or running out of idea, so what they gonna do next for 2018 movie season, yeah, make a sequel to The Incredibles and Toy Story trilogy, but, The Incredibles 2 could have been great if it's not have been a copy of the original 2004 movie, instead of just swapping Bob for Helen, they could make the story about Dash and Violet age up becoming young adults with Bob and Helen in their 50s, that would have been much better and more interesting stories than just swapping Bob for Helen for literally the same story in the sequel we got, plus, The Incredibles 2 have no mention of Syndrome at all, one of Pixar best villain which make the sequel feel disconnected from the original Incredibles, of course, the point still stand that The Incredibles 2 have more potential to becoming a good sequel than Toy Story 4, because clearly, Toy Story 3 already taken that role as a finale to Toy Story trilogy, and now Pixar is greenlighting Toy Story 5 just for another cash grab if they make it similar to Toy Story 4
@@curious5887 Personally, I really liked Toy Story 4! I found the reunion between Woody and Bo Peep touching. Bo Peep brought an interesting point of view. What happens to the abandoned toys? I hope we will see her again in the next movie!
@@SuperPlacido1 well, clearly if you like it, fine, but it’s still doesn’t excuse the problem with the movie, being a cash grab installment, and it clearly contradict anything that Toy Story 3 had established
I feel like one of the reason that Disney Pixar is kept making sequel, is that the "what's next" to the plot of the movie leading to the people asking what happened to this character, or what's next on this movie, I wanna know the next chapter, something like that and yes I'm one of that people.
Pixar Sequels / Prequels & Spin-offs Ranked: 01: Toy Story 3 🌟 02: Toy Story 2 🌟 03: Incredibles 2 ✅ 04: Toy Story 4 ✅ 05: Cars 3 ✅ 06: Monsters University ⚠️ 07: Finding Dory ⚠️ 08: Lightyear ⛔️ 09: Cars 2 ⛔️ Overall - I enjoy Pixar sequels more than most, but Pixar outside of the Toy Story franchise, works better with standalone stories.
Just my 2 cents, but Incredibles 2, Cars 3 and Toy Story 4 are all rubbish, and Cars 2 deserves to be up a rank. Monsters University in my opinion should be in the number 4 spot. Thing about Cars 2 is yes, it has a lot of problems, but it IS at least fun and memorable, I even now remember most scenes in the movie. At the very least, Cars 2 is so bad that it is ironically good. Cars 3’s worst sin is being forgettable. I can’t remember half the scenes in it. The pacing was horrible too, I almost fell asleep several times while watching it, and the new characters are just not fun characters nor interesting ones either.
@@truekiropfan8329 Cruz is a great character! Maybe it's too childish for you Cars! That could be another reason why you don't like these movies! Is it possible? And what didn't you like about Toy Story 4 and The Incredibles 2?
Bruh come on, I don’t get the Cars 1 movie hate. Its honestly pretty solid, nowhere near as good as let’s say Ratatouille or Wall-E, but good nonetheless. Good animation, great voice acting, good story/message, likable characters, great music and a brilliant ending. Sure the world doesn’t make sense but that doesn’t take me out of the movie at all. The other two are shit tho I’ll admit to that 🗿
2 is pretty bad I agree but 3 has a lot of weight and it's like they actually tried, they even tried to undo the damage of 2 as if it didn't happen and shift back the focus to mqueen and even give Sally a notable presence it's like it was the actual sequel to the 1st movie and not some spin off movie that lacks actual substance. I even like some of the newer aditions like Cruz and the older race cars and the ending I feel was the best way to finish it i think compared to the unused ones
@@nightwish1453 In some ways I agree. Ngl I was hella hyped back when cars 3 came out in 2017, but even tho it was better than 2 I left with a sour taste in my mouth with how it ended. I felt sad not being able to see Mcqueen get his big win over Storm. Cruz winning makes sense, but would've preferred Lightning to win. Also there's a deleted scene showing what it would've looked like if Mcqueen won and tbh its a much more wholesome and emotional ending more me.
@@timbuktoofat I think the issue of Mqueen winning is that it kind of just throws Cruz over the bus. I think having it so that the race starts with mqueen but ends with Cruz is the best way to do it. the other versions make it hard to route for both competing eachother or the character development was wrapped up too quickly, or the one in charge of rusteez sees the potential in cruz not mqueen is a bit iffy. the basic one where mqueen just wins while fine is a bit too predictable and kind of unrealistic against storm for that matter
I think what ultimately killed Incredibles 2, was the hype. I still really enjoyed it, and I've watched it numerous times since, but fans (myself included) came up with so many theories and ideas, and speculation, that it turned the sequel into something it could never live up to, and that made me really sad... never mind the fact that Incredibles is one of the best films ever made... I guess I just miss going blindly into a film, and being taken for a ride. The sequel definitely had a weaker story... but the hype was the deathblow. That said... it's clear you don't like films that deviate from the "main" character's story-arc. That's fine, but you must know that doesn't inherently make a film bad. I've watched Cars 2 quite a few times, and maybe it's because I enjoy Larry the Cable Guy's spoof films like "Health Inspector" but it really is a fun film, that really expands Mater as a character... albeit, in a rather extravagant way. I'm sorry you don't really enjoy films that expands a "side" character story, but that doesn't make a film bad... you just don't like films about side characters... again, that's fine, but you need to isolate those things. Case in point, your opinion of "Finding Dory." The sequels work, they just don't tell a story you want to hear... and to that I say, to each their own." But back to Incredibles 2. Certainly the story was weaker than the original, but what you deduce, didn't actually happen in the first one. Hellen never got her chance to be the vigilante while Bob never stayed home and "settled down" like he wanted. Not that they didn't get their moments, which were great... but it was just that... a moment. We don't know the full extent of why Supers were outlawed, or for that matter, how they came to be in the first place... but that's where the sequel shines, in many ways. You see, while society might be accepting in the moment after the Omnidroid, it wouldn't take long after that to go right back to hating Supers... though maybe hate is the wrong word... but they've certainly made the decision as a global society, that the Benefits of Supers, are far outweighed by the Costs.... society tends not to be that forgiving, and it's clear they were wronged by literally all Supers in the past. That's where Winston and Evylin come in. It's apparent that discussions are happening about reversing the decision, and we have one sibling "for" while the other is "against" Supers... and honestly, Evylin's reasoning isn't wrong... and crucially, the "justice" she is served... isn't what Syndrome got... she's still out there somewhere... and that's terrifying in so many ways. In many ways Incredibles 2 faired worse, because it was too real. The struggles Bob faces at home are what any parent must deal with, and going from a workoholic to a primary-caregiver is a huge amount of whiplash... goodness, I cried when he told Dash he'd figured out his math. Eventually though, they both get what they craved in Incredibles opening dialogue... Hellen gets to be the vigilante saving the world, while maintaining her deep connection to raising her kids... that thing her younger self didn't believe she needed. Meanwhile Bob realizes just how much being the "hero" occupied his ego, in an equally unhealthy way... he learned he didn't know anything about his own kids needs. Hellen was always "I'll fight if I absolutely have to" and Bob was "I'll take care of the kids, if I must" basically in denial of their other desires and duties. By the end of Incredibles 2, they have found a balance and peace, which didn't exist but for an instant, in Incredibles...(nevermind the journey Violet and Dash go on... those arcs could be a video in themselves)... but it's just beautiful. I love your channel and content, but I think you missed the mark on this video. Like I said, everyone has their own preferences, and you make yours quite clear... and that's great! Nothing wrong with that... we're all entitled to our own opinions. My only point is these "broken" sequels might not be as broken as you think they are. Have a wonderful day my friend!
His opinion about Finding Dory does not seem like a fully realized opinion. He says nothing about what makes Finding Dory specifically a bad sequel, and if it does anything wrong that were or were not already done in Cars 2. Aldone really needs to watch Finding Dory again. I see what you are saying about his talk on that film only amounting to not liking films about side characters in general. 😭Even though Finding Dory actually did a much better job at expanding on the story of Dory, and it served the overall story of Finding Nemo, contenting on the themes and tradition of Dory and Nemo teaching Marlin to try new things and be brave like them. I do not understand this! Aldone is not giving Finding Dory a fair evaluation if he says it is another great sequel, but still discredits and disregards it for doing what Cars 2 did with Mater, while not giving Finding Dory the credit that it really truly deserves for doing a much better job with Dory than with Mater, and maintaining a reason for Dory to serve Marlin and Nemo's story, and for Marlin and Nemo to serve Dory's story. If he did not review it yet just because he wants to avoid talking about Ellen Degeneres, then I do not know why he has not already talked about what kind of sequel it is in his opinion. That is why Aldone needs to re-watch this for its own review!
I wasn't able to fully grasp what about Toy Story 4 (as a supporter for TS4 being a good movie) made it feel like it doesn't continue the story well. And it's because the story revolved around Andy and I never had the words for it. The story is complete at the end because Andy's journey with his toys (and growing up) has ended and the story is told. However, I will say that's the thing about TS4 that I love. It shifts the focus to the one toy who's world revolved around making sure Andy was a happy kid. What does that toy do now? Make the new owner, Bonnie, happy? Sure but Bonnie is a young kid and her emotions are all over the place. The cowboy was cool for a couple days when she first found him but she just found her other toys more in line with her tastes. Hell, her new favorite toy is a spork. I adore the deconstruction of those emotions and how your meaning in life can't be supported by somebody else's happiness. It's learning how to be in a healthy relationship and that your happiness has to come from you. Sure the execution isn't perfect (looking at the buzz plot even though it just occurred to me how it's relevant to the plot) but it's a thematically important movie that utilizes our familiarity of the character and the depth in which we understand his life's purpose. I know it ruins the trilogy but I see 4 as the epilogue since there was something left to be said that doesn't revolve around the heart of the whole story but it does involve important characters. You don't have to watch 4 and the trilogy is perfect on its own. 4 says something tho that I feel couldn't have been better said without the build up of this character. And learning that there's a 5 in the making is really frustrating. There *is* no where left for this story to go. 4 pushed the limits and I let it slide (and it proved itself to me) but 5?!?! I can't even think of a phony plot. Anyways, thanks for putting into words why TS is a trilogy with an epilogue. Tangent over.
9:55, Tron:Uprising was way better than Tron:Legacy. (Don’t get me wrong, I think Legacy was pretty good (though not as good as the original Tron movie) but Uprising eclipses it entirely.)
When Pixar first started, it was a fledgling young studio, now that it's mainstream, it's now just another studio being run as a business, where everything has to make money, and everyone involved wants in on the jackpot. As a result, I see Pixar, like Disney, are cash grabbing using nostalgia and established content to maximise profits, this is why their films are rehashes and reboots, it's easier and cheaper to produce films this way, however, studios should not be run as if they are mills. I think it was telling that Pixar did not win best animated feature during the Oscars or Golden Globes, that went to Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio, which was creative, artistic and a passionate story, Turning Red and Cars are the only Pixar films that did not win best animated film, it would be nice if Pixar could animate a film as awesome as del Toro's Pinocchio, but in the end, I have better alternatives, such as Studio Ghibli and Cartoon Saloon.
Actually, Monsters, Inc, Incredibles 2 (regardless of your thoughts on the film), Onward and Luca ALSO didn’t win Best Animated Feature at the either the Golden Globes or Academy Awards.
I agree with you. I would say that Toy Story 2, 3, and Incredibles 2 are easily the best sequels Pixar has ever made. If you don’t mind me asking who do you think is the greatest director in the history of Pixar?
People keep dissing Cars for no reason, this guy’s no exception. What do you mean “Good by their standards”? This movie is just as good as the other movies before it like Toy Story, Monsters Inc, and Finding Nemo.
Pixar’s trying to be dreamworks. Even before puss and boots, dreamworks was good with sequels, from king fu panda and how to train your dragon. Pixar’s model used to be making new and original films with little sequels except for toy story (and maybe monsters university, tho that is a prequel). I just think pixar either needs to stay in their lane or get better at the sequel game
he doesn't actually mention cars 3 at all, I feel 3 is left under a radar because of 2 which is understandable and despite the minor efforts in 3 that subtly pretend 2 didn't happen the 3 can initally give out a turn off
I'm glad someone else also pointed out Toy story 4 just ruined what toy story 3 in the ending and I hated lightyear its obvious cash grab attempt on and star command series and movie is alot better. Yeah some of these squeals just ruin what made original movies good and message. Yeah looks at disney/pixar its obvious what direction they are going with lousy live action and cash grab on squeals they don't care about quality thats why I'm looking at dreamworks they at least care original movies.
8:18 That’s pretty much been my feeling towards Lightyear. I see it less as the movie that would’ve made Andy a fan, and more like a franchise reboot that original fans like him would’ve detested and rejected.
You really need to study cars it was an amazing movie that was a passion project from the information the story and even the cast Cars gives a powerful story about caring about your friends and family rather than yourself cars was so damn good it almost won the Oscar I honestly think Cars is up there with Up and finding Nemo
Unpopular opinion: I loved Toy Story 4. I didn’t expect to enjoy it, but I was pleasantly surprised. I don’t think we needed it though, and we definitely don’t need Toy Story 5.
As Schaffrillas said before " Illumination makes sequels for money, Sony makes sequels for money, Disney and Pixar make sequels for money. DreamWorks makes sequels for art. "
…and money pretty soon.😂
@@SemmieWNT well that's the sad part if someone makes good money they overusing it and won't care except the money I mean it's called Money ruins character
@@Simbala-bq5vy I was just continuing the sentence Technocrat said
DreamWorks makes it for money too though. (Boss Baby 2, Trolls 2 and 3)
@@purple1441 all of their cartoons show
Incredibles 2 should have done a time jump and age the characters like How to Train Your Dragon 2 did. Dash, Violet and Jack Jack are grown up now. Bob and Helen are now retired. The main character could have been Jack Jack coming to terms with himself. The story may not sound as original as the first one that dealt with a superhero's midlife crisis, but it's at least something.
It also would have made the technology and social jump way more believable. The first Incredibles had the time period maybe a few decades before 2000 or around that time, which you can tell by Bob’s car, the city look, the lack of high technology, etc.
However, I2 just seemed way too modern and tech savy for taking place literally a few minutes from the end of I1.
The time jump would have also allowed the family to develop a new dynamic, introduce new things more easily, and give Pixar/Disney more leeway in filling that time skip out later.
Like HTTYD 2 takes place about 5 years from the first one, and DreamWorks later went in and filled it with the shows and shorts to expand the world. It doesn’t detract from the movies, but gives the crews a time frame and boundaries to explore concepts and ideas that would later be reflected in the movies. Like, we see that Hiccup developed his flight suit in HTTYD2 and because of the time skip, we didn’t really question “why does he have this?” It was more like “neat! He must have been tinkering with that for a while to make it work.” Race to the Edge then shows the progress of the flight suit progression, which fans can enjoy if they’re really interested in knowing. But even without that, the flight suit still works on its own in HTTYD2.
@@jendoe9436 Since the first movie took place in the 60s, they could have made a time jump into the 70s. Have Violet and Dash be in their 20s and being full-time superheroes while Jack-Jack deals with being in school and Bob and Helen are enjoying retirement.
Violet dating a non-super and being unsure when to tell him about her powers, balancing her super life with her normal one (and getting help by Lucius and his wife too)
Dash, while nothing out of note, meets other supers his age but also makes a friend of a genius non-super
Jack-Jack have issues controlling his powers as an emotional kid
And Bob accepting that his days as a super are over while Helen has to live with the fact that her kids are leaving the nest
This being around the time when the legal process around getting supers back wasn't full in motion yet - they could, but there is no support from the government yet. The villain in this case would be another extreme of a fan from the first movie, some guy who wants to make supers legal and thus wreaks havoc
His reason being that he wants to make people realize that they need to depend on supers because their own police and firemen and what not can't always help them.
This would be an interesting conflict - where we have non-supers in the incredibles lives, helping them and proving that you don't need powers to do good or (help) rescue the world. Basically end this whole "God like image" of the supers from the first movie, where normal people are portrayed as incompetent or helpless mostly.
Instead, they work all together.
Edit: the movie would end with politicians re-establishing that heroes can work again - difference to before is that they would be not supported by the state or police, we wouldn't have police interact with them like they're part of the team like in the first movie.
incredibles 2 feels like an elastic girl spin off
Idk, Jack Jack is pretty boring character and we don't need _another_ Dysney princess story about finding yourself. People love the whole family and movie about whole family fighting together against crimes would be great.
The difference between the Disney/Pixar sequels and Dreamworks sequels is that if Dreamworks creates a bad sequel, it doesn't have much effect on the whole franchise. Just like Shrek 3 which you can totally ignore the film and nothing will happen to the whole franchise. Whereas for the Disney, those bad sequels can also effect the first films and undermine the whole massage of the franchise. Just look at toy story 4 and Ralph breaks the internet. They ruin the whole message and theme of the franchise, thus I can never look at these franchises the same.
You know Shrek the Third is bad when even Shrek Forever After ignores the film other than Shrek and Fiona’s kids. We don’t even see Arthur in the third film despite becoming the new king of Far Far Away.
@@hunterolaughlin Shrek ever after is underrated, by the way.
Ralph breaks the internet is not a Pixar movie.
Well, httyd 3 also ruin the message of the franchise
@@hunterolaughlin so, it didn't ignore the movie. The kids is enough to say that it wasn't ignored.
Only good Pixar sequel is Toy Story 2 & 3
You forgot Cars 3
I liked Toy Story 2 & 3, Monsters University (Not a sequel, but I'll still count it), Finding Dory, Cars 3 and that's it.
Toy Story 4 is quite amazing as well. Cried at the end.
@@diegosanchez5412 Monster's University has the same problem most pixar sequels have
Where it completely disregards the original, the arcs in it, and the lore. So if you're a die-hard fan of the OG it feels extremely disappointing
Also the fact that it plays every single cliche from a college movie straight with not an ounce of self awareness made it a hard watch
@@TulpechaidoplaysMC Well that’s because it’s not a sequel, it’s a prequel, totally different.
I hate how Pixar seems so cash grabby now. Like, I know they're a business, and earning money is important, but in the 2000s, they seemed to be a humble studio full of people who loved to tell stories and were proud of the legacy they were creating for themselves. And now, it just seems like all they care about is taking familiar characters that we love and just sticking them on to recycled plots in sequels that aren't necessary, or don't measure up to the original.
I’ve heard that once Disney got involved they demanded more sequels. However, if it is Pixar’s independent decision then they really don’t have an excuse. Their originals were all extremely successful. I guess it takes more time and effort to come up with a new concept and doing that is difficult when you need to make a film each year.
@@emiliano_rm2006 Yeah, Steve Jobs was really against Disney buying Pixar out. They were just partners all the way up to Up. TS3 was their first official Disney owned release. Disney also used their animators to render stuff for their own films (Frozen). I think Jobs was protecting the integrity of Pixar really well and whenever he got ill, his efforts and wishes weren't respected. I used to adore this studio and now I mildly keep up with their releases.
@@emiliano_rm2006 I don't get it? If the sequel ends up being good, isn't it all that matters? It has nothing to do with just wanting money if they put real effort to it.
Finding Dory measured up to the original. So did the prequel of Monsters University, and the sequel series Monsters at Work.
I'm inexplicably fond of Monsters University despite its weaknesses, it's just a fun watch. And I love Finding Dory, parts of it hit so close to home I was crying in the theater; also we got introduced to Gerald, who is very relatable more often than not.
The messages and themes in Monsters university about inadequacy and rising above personal factors you were born with (Mike not being scary) to achieve your goals are great and really affected me when I saw it the first time. They should've focused on that sentiment and built it up better over the course of the movie, which would've made the climax way more compelling instead of the random scare games stuff. I feel like the movie would've been better received as a subversive masterpiece like Megamind if it just focused on what was really important regarding the characters instead of having some side adventure.
Finding Dory was just a Rosalina's Backstory rip off
I think people sadly forget Monsters University, I mean heck Aldone didn’t even mention it. No offense to him.
@@andrewstokka3662 He did not want to talk about Monsters U because it is a prequel.
Yeah monster's university was a comfort film for me lmao. Like I dunno why but every single time I feel ill or very anxious I put it on. There's just something about it that's so comforting.
What the heck will toy story 5 be about? Learning about what 4 did diseartened me to the core of how the characters were disrespected.
The biggest problem with the Disney/Pixar sequels is that they really have nothing to say that expand the story as well as the original....with the exception of Toy Story 2 and 3, non of these sequels give us anything really new.....there are minor things these films does well, like I love Monsters University last Scare in the real world, but the film itself is pointless, specially, knowing the story of Monsters Inc. and this is a problem in most of their sequels.........I like Incredibles 2, love the action sequences with Elastic girl, but the overall story and conflict is just a repeat of the first one but with Helen as the protagonist instead of Bob and a lackluster excuse of a villain compared to the incredible (no pun intended XD) Syndrome. Not get me start on Disneys sequels like Frozen 2, the godawful Ralphs Breaks the Internet and the countless lifeless direct to DVD sequels (with a few veryyyy few exceptions).....when you see in the other side of the fence with Dreamworks is the total opposite......their sequels absolutely expand the story and characters making the world feel bigger and better, with amazing sequels like Shreak 2, forever after, Kung Fu Panda 2 and 3, How to Train your Dragon 2 and 3 and recently Puss in Boots the Last Wish, not only the sequels are good, they rival the original if not SURPASS THEM, as they should. Overall I rather Disney stop making sequels, there was a reason why Walt Disney himself never tried that and for the longest the company respected that, until that era of straight to DVD and in some cases most of us ignored all those films as non canon, but now is impossible with Frozen 2 and Ralphs Break the Internet and that is just sad.
I agree with you for what you said except for forever after which is a pointless, incoherent and boring sequel
@@PakoVero Opinions on Forever After have been mixed. A lot of people think it's as bad as Shrek the Third, while others think it doesn't deserve the hate.
Cinderella 3: A Twist in Time is pretty good imo but overall I agree with you
Lion King 2 and Bambi 2 were good though Bambi was a midquel instead
I didn't even botger to read your comment to the end but we can't know for sure if the sequel works.
Pixar’s golden age was from 1995 to 2010. Coincidently, it began with Toy Story 1 and ended with Toy Story 3.
I know it's not a Pixar movie, but this trend makes me really scared for Zootopia 2...
I agree
I pray to God that one is the ONLY good thing that'll come out of them for this generation.
I don't want to see the potential broken for that type of sequel... my heart won't take that💀
@@youngspecial64 Yeah, my worry is that Nick and Judy will get separated in a really forced way.
Frozen 2 did it.
Wreck It Ralph 2 did it.
Toy Story 4 did it.
@@PlanetZoidstar
The anger within my *VEINS* if that happens... but i have to keep a level head and have some faith that they won't mess this up towards unpairable damage.
That's all any of us can do, at this point.
@@youngspecial64 Exactly, Zootopia was built on the bond that Judy and Nick grew through their adventure.
If the sequel breaks them apart for some bullshit reason, it will just invalidate the first movie completely.
What I want to see? I want them to go all-in and have Nick and Judy get engaged at the end of the movie. I want Zootopia 2 to be about them trying to make a relationship work in a Zootopia that, while it's ready to treat Predators as equals to Prey, they're not ready to validate a Predator/Prey relationship.
Then have Zootopia 3 end with them getting married and having kids. Adopted or interspecies, just it would put a wholesome bow on their relationship.
They're clearly into eachother.
The 2000's was the golden age of Pixar
About Toy Story 4, it really was a terrible sequel in a pretty coat of paint. Like, Bonnie very CLEARY still plays with Woody and enjoys playing with him DURING THE MOVIE.
bonnie played with him once during that movie and it was because of sporkie 💀
@@dollfairytopia Well, whether you like it or not, she still cared about Woody. If she didn't care, she would've left him on the sidewalk and only play with Forky.
Dreamworks has no problem with making sequels even when there is a big gap between the last release. They announced Kung Fu Panda 4 for the 2024 release meanwhile Kung Fu Panda 3 came out in 2016. That's an 8-year wait while the original trilogy had about two 4-year gaps between installments. Between the original Puss in Boots and its sequel passed almost 12 years. Puss in Boots 2 also foreshadowed a potential sequel to the Shrek franchise for which the last movie was Shrek Forever After in 2010. The Croods came out in 2013, and its sequel The Croods: New Age came out in 2020. Again with huge positive critical and box office reception. $216 million from a $65 million budget. Dreamworks is the master of sequels!
Disney and Pixar sequels feel like cash grabs.
You are wrong with Disney and Pixar!
@@SuperPlacido1 most Pixar sequel are cash grabs (except for Cars 3), they just feel more like cash grab copy of their predecessor, especially The Incredibles 2, while all Dreamworks sequels work because they are bold and have more thoughts put into them (except for Shrek : The Third from 2010)
@@curious5887 You forgot Troll 2! This is another sequel crap by Dreamworks! Pixar sequels are excellent! You can not say Toy Story 2 & 3 are shit! Even The Incredibles 2 is great! I want a sequel for Luca! Luca was an excellent movie!
@@SuperPlacido1 Incredibles 2 was great? Now that's a laugh. Dreamworks has way more good sequels under their belt than Disney and Pixar combined (I mean, they only got 2 good sequels, so obviously).
@@AeridisArt Not able to respect people's opinion?
I’d still rather watch a sequel or prequel than a remake.
With regards to Lightyear, despite what it says at the beginning of the film, I think it’s more likely that Andy watched the Buzz Lightyear of Star Command series as a kid, and Lightyear is the dark and gritty reboot aimed at capitalising on adult Andy’s nostalgia for the TV show.
On a related note, they should have just given us a Lion King 3, instead of a live-action remake of The Lion King. Simba's pride and 1 1/2 were great sequels even if they didn't live up to the original. At this point I'm really worried about the live-action Lion King prequel, Mufasa.
I was momentarily confused at first, cause in some countries, Lion King 1 1/2 is called Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata.
I'm not sure I care enough to be worried about the Mufasa prequel.
@@richardblakely6854 Why'd they called 1 1/2 "TLK3"? Even though Timon in the preview removed the three and changed it to "1 1/2". As both Timon and Pumbaa agreed that it wasn't even a sequel, but a midquel instead.
What really made the first Incredibles special was that it was a parody/subversion of classic super hero tropes.
Super Heroes being sued, being blamed for the collateral damage they caused, being banned and having to get their Hero kicks surreptitiously, making fun of capes, villains monologing etc all this within a family dynamic is what made it really clever.
All gone in the sequel.
Not related, but I sadly felt the same way about Desenchanted - the first one served as a sort of parody/subverted troupes, while the second just threw everything out the window.
Heck even the animation was different. I know animation is hard, I study it, but you'd think Disney, who started as an ANIMATION company, would release a movie with animation that's at least identical to the original - instead of it feeling lifeless and janky in certain scenes.
i wouldn't say parody the movie actually kind of seems to take itself very seriously for the most part
The main problem is that almost none of their sequels continue the story, they just rehash plot elements from the original films. The big example being Incredibles 2 resetting everything that was resolved in the first film and repeating the plot but worse.
The only franchises that actually tell new stories with each film are Toy Story and, shockingly, Cars.
Another issue is that despite these sequels coming more than a decade after the original films, no time actually passes between movies. Toy Story helps illustrate the problem. Toy story 1 and 2 have a two year time gap between them that is reflected in the movies. Toy story 3 came out more than a decade later and that is incorporated into the movie, we feel that Andy has grown up with us. But then Toy Story 4 came out 9 years after the last sequel but it's only been a year in-universe? Why don't we get to see Bonnie grow up like we did with Andy? Because now the priority is making sure these characters are recognisable so people who remember their childhoods will buy a ticket. Jack-Jack must stay a baby, Violet must always be an anxious teenager, and Dash must always be a rascally little boy. It just feels fake. Again, ironically, Cars is the only franchise without this issue. Between every movie, time is shown to pass and that's cool.
You can also apply the "rehashing" to Toy Story 4 too. The main characters have completely different personalities contrary to the ones they used to have in Toy Story 1, 2 and 3. The plot is Woody wanting to find someone new because "Bonnie doesn't play with him". Despite being played with in the movie itself. The plot is fundamentally broken and the logic thats established is broken too.
Reminds me of when they made those straight to video home media sequels at Disney.
Those VHS/DVDs sequels were trash
@@Dave102693except Cinderella 3 and the Lion King sequels. Right?
@@yuri-sama.questionmark Yep those were the only good sequels
@@Simbala-bq5vy They really should have given us a Lion King 3 instead of a live-action remake. That remake was horrible. And I'm truly worried about the live-action Lion king prequel, mufasa.
I remember being beyond obsessed with Cars 2 when I was five. I was constantly reenacting the opening scene with my toys and I think it was my one of my favorite movies ever. I have never loved a movie like that in a long time.
Inside Out could have a good sequel. There's a lot of potential in that concept
Disney films and sequels now are not as how they were back in the good old days, amazing video!
But we don't have to depend on them anymore if they lost themselves.
We have people like Dreamworks on the scene in creating good animated films again, showing that they're still there to pick up the slack that we've been dealing with throughout all these years.
And there are other studios as well, like the people who are creating across the spider-verse and that teenage mutant ninja turtles movie.
Disney sequels in the "good old days" were direct-to-video cash grabs but alright
@@SomeoneThatIsHappy I mean Lion King 2: Simba's pride And Lion King 1 1/2 were good sequels in their own right.
@@alphonsejohnson5601 yeah, and Cinderella 3 was also great. But those are 3 good movies out of 26 direct-to-video sequels man. Same thing with Disney's new cash grab tactic that is live action remakes, there were some decent ones, but overral it is horrible
Pixar’s strength was always in stand alone stories.
I always wondered why we never got a sequel for those three Pixar movies that I consider the "Golden Back-to-Backs" [Ratatouille, Wall-E, and UP], yet now I understand why. Ratatouille's ending perfectly shows that Remy got what he wanted in life and everybody is happy. Wall-E's ending shows that humanity returned to Earth to change it for the better and Wall-E and Eve got their happy ending. UP's ending shows that Carl fulfilled the promise he made to Ellie all those years ago and Russel was able to finally become a Senior Wilderness Explorer, plus Doug was able to find his true master, giving them their happy ending.
These movies are perfect and don't need sequels. Plus, the only good sequels we've seen are Toy Story 2 and 3 [And Monster's University, but that's a prequel so it doesn't really count]. So if we did, they most likely would be pretty terrible...
Well, technically Dug Days could be considered a spiritual sequel to Up.
Cars 2 is a fun movie to watch with friends. I watched it with my friends from marching band in high school before we all left for college and it was too funny. But on a serious note I'm in the camp that the movie wouldn't have been as hated if it was called Mater's Tall Tales the movie or something rather than Cars 2
And that name issue literally doesn't mat(t)er at all
TRUE
I agree that it probably should of been just called Mater's Tall Tales : The Movie
Especially when Cars 3 feels like an actual sequel to the first one, in which if you remove cars 2 you wouldn't know at all that it was missing.
@@MarioKartSuperCircuit exactly. Cars 3 feels more like a Cars 2
@@UltimateTS64 i feel like we needed a movie about McQueen an Mater's friensmdship and more of Mater as a friend. And while I kind of agree I just don't get how the hell the name of a movie should be a reason to think of it any differently. Call me crazy but I think being petty is one of the biggest problems in the world.
The original Pixar films are so perfectly focused in their story that it's very difficult for it to be expanded apon without making it feel tacked on.
I think you need to rewatch the entire Toy Story series again and then tell me with a straight face that Toy Story 4 does not ruin the entire story and make every character into a shell of their former selves.
It's not even a good movie
I did, and I can't quite agree.
I did that last week and I 1000% agree
Yep, Toy Story 4 (and the upcoming 5th movie) are nothing by soulless cashgrabs from Disney. The story is so shallow, I could stand in a puddle of it and not get my feet wet. Also reads like really bad fanfiction, where all the characters have to be eviscerated in order for the plot to make sense.
@@adityagandhi9882 I think the point is that Woody can enjoy his new life without goodbyes. I mean, distance has never stopped him from meeting Buzz and the gang again. You can't say you abandon your family when you move out and live your life with your partner. I'd much rather do that than being around my family just being there with no purpose in life.
Sequels aren’t just a money making opportunity. They’re also an exercise for creators to both revisit and expand the world of the previous film(s) with a new installment.
It ultimately affects different camps of the fandom in different ways.
The difference between pixar and dreamworks is their movie. Pixar tends to create a story that focus on one movie and one ending, while dreamworks always prepares for expanding their franchise. For example, Up, Coco, Wall e are movies which have the beginning and ending in one movie, like Carl lost his wife and began journey to full fill her dream, and at the end he learnt to live for new life and stop living in the past. Meanwhile when we watch httyd, the ending of the first movie is about Hiccup lived with the dragons. The ending of the first films could be expanded more about to keep living with the dragons. And at the last movie, we see that living with dragons could effect to their dragons life.
I think the monotony of the majority of Pixar sequels just show how well made the original stories where.
None of this sequels beside the Toy Story franchise seemed like they wanted to make them, more like petitions by Disney to sell merch.
Idk why people hate on the Toy Story sequels. Each one is great and holds its own weight in my opinion. The dynamic of Andy and Woody has evolved so much that Woody is now a Toy without a purpose. He’s an old stuffed Cowboy with a pull string. Kids want modern things and Woody’s old now. 1 was the new favorite toy dilemma, 2 was clearing out the old toys, yard sale and change, 3 was the growth of Andy and saying goodbye to his toys, 4 was Woody saying goodbye to his friends because he’s useless without Andy. So you’re wrong, it all does come full circle back to Andy. Without Andy, Woody lost his purpose and had to move on with other “lost toys”. Id love to see the 5th tackle the new generation era problems. Like kids playing with Phones and video games and not needing toys at all anymore.. Getting pushed to the side again by the new new
Except woody is a toy with purpose. They went over this in Toy Story 2 with Jessie. Unless you’ve never seen that movie. Saying it came full
Circle doesn’t work, when it came full circle in 3 with woody and Andy separating. Woody didn’t need to find purpose because his character was never about that. It was about making his owners happy. Something that again, Toy Story 2 already touched upon.
If anything, it makes more sense for Jessie to be a lost toy than woodys. Because her owner already left her and she wouldn’t have any purpose more than woody, because she was given up once again
@@BabyGirlTiny yes but now he has no owner. He has no purpose. He was “Andy’s” toy.. So yes, full circle.. What you said was quite contradicting
I've always said this but Incredibles 2 should've stuck with the family but had them evolved more. Instead of "it's ladies night" have Dash still with Elastigirl and create a mother/son dynamic with having Dash "slow down" learning to use his head more and Elastigirl "Keep up" with her son and getting back to being a super.
Instead of Cars 2, it would've been better if it was a spy cars spinoff movie with Finn Mcmissle as the main character. Or maybe just have a completely original Pixar spy movie with a human main character who is a secret agent and happens to drive a talking car that's a mix of KITT from Knight Rider and the Aston Martin from James Bond.
The fact that there was a Pixar/Disney ad on this before I could watch it is ironic.
I’ll be completely honest.
I really love Cars 2.
It’s really enjoyable in my opinion.
Oh and Monsters University if we’re counting that-
I am very certain that Aldone did not count Monsters University in this video because that is a prequel.
I think a problem not enough people bring up is the animation itself. The animation quality itself isn't bad per-say, in fact it's just as good as ever. But at the same time however, I feel like it's reached a point where Pixar's approach to animation and HOW they use it for their films is fundamentally flawed. Especially with the sequels. While technically they look way better than the originals, in some ways they also look WORSE if you really think about it. And in a lot of ways, pretty animation with barely any substance is just another contributing factor as to why most Pixar sequels fail. Even with the advancements in lighting, cloth details, the works, the final result in a lot of Pixar's recent films look like the same damn movie with little to no variation in the core aesthetic and lighting choices. It's pretty much just "the first movie's animation again but with more prettier colors and detailed lighting". They literally feel like tech demos with a half-assed story written last minute, might I add. Not only that, but there's even some parts of presentation where they completely forgot why certain elements looked the way they did before (outside of the tech being limited at the time). To further illustrate this point, look at the lighting in both Incredibles movies and you'll see a massive difference visually. One's got an artistic purpose that contributes to the film's story and tone, and the other's just a glorified saturday morning cartoon made to look pretty on the big screen. Do the same for all other pixar sequels after TS3 and you'll see the pattern. What's that pattern? Pixar's too focused on flexing their technical muscles while also forgetting good storytelling and artistic choices that made the originals work.
I think the greatest example of what you just said has been in their recent work, most notably Soul. I wonder how much better the animation would have been if it were stylized instead of 3D realism where the characters don't look realistic. Even if they did their first 2D with soul i think it would have worked better. But that movie had so much creative potential that I feel it got held back by its pixar approach to animation.
Toy Story 3 is a Pixar MASTERPIECE IMO
TRON LEGACY IS MAD UNDERRATED
Tron: Uprising was great
Agreed!
Look, people.
Just move over to dreamworks and other studios and ignore whatever the hell disney is doing.
They're going to keep producing garbage if they don't want to change, so let's just flat out abandon them like how they abandoned their touch on good animated films and crap in general.
*It's as simple as that.*
Maybe that's what Disney needs. They need to start losing money every time they make something bad so they can see what the public doesn't like and they can make more good stuff and, in turn, more money.
@@elijahcandage
Yup... the literal definition of their consequence on producing garbage after nonsense within a yearly bases with no depth, passion, or any creative vision.
Just one small push, and they can truly be disciplined and learn the error of their ways.
*"All it takes is a little PUSH"*
I agree with everything here except for Monsters University. That movie is incredibly executed
FINALLY
I thought I was going crazy when I thought I was the only one who thought that Toy Story 4 wasn't that good of a sequel, because it kind of destroyed the importance of Woody to Bonnie, thus kind of destroying the ending of 3.
I used to love TOY STORY 3 until it was pointed out to me that it’s the exact same movie as TOY STORY 2. The toys are separated from Andy and placed into a new, dangerous real-world environment where a seemingly friendly Southern+chubby old man toy who leads the group ends up being the antagonist who’s bitter about being abandoned by his previous owner and a conflict ensues to escape. It’s really astonishing how widely overlooked this is. It’s so similar, it’s ridiculous.
You could easily say that for the first film as well, Woody (although not chubby or old looking) was seemingly nice before Buzz came around and then he turned antagonistic once he was worried about being replaced since Andy was playing with Buzz more.
This was established in the final act of Woody's evil scheme by "accidentally" pushing Buzz out of the window as a way of getting rid of Buzz, now making the other toys think he did it on purpose since he spoke harshly of Buzz and they all turn on him.
Woody and Buzz end up both separated from Andy and end up having to survive through wacky antics like Sid using them as test subjects and Pizza Planet.
It's been the plot of the Toy Story franchise since day one.
I don't think it's the story per se, I truly believe Disney and Pixar lose the vibe and charm of each franchise somehow with their newer films. It's like they don't understand the previous film(s) wherein DreamWorks/Illumination do. Not all the sequels of the latter studios are great, but they seem to keep the vibe and characters consistent. Disney and Pixar's are awkward and it feels like they don't know the characters when they come back. It's off-putting and cheesy and that's why I don't like them. They try too hard when maybe they should just do a fun adventure with them without ruining the characters to make some kind of artsy statement that doesn't make sense for them.
Even though many people hate cars, you can’t deny it was part of almost every kid’s life
Plus, it is part of the Pixar catalog. That’s not something they can change or ignore. They can still hate it, but overall it’s still a Pixar film.
@@hunterolaughlin I mean, they can ignore it’s existence, but they can’t change it, like you said
Cars 1 is a solid part of Pixar's catalog.
Yeah I still don’t get why people always look down upon it
@@MM-ij1jh its so good
My FAVORITE ones are Finding Dory, Toy Story 2&3, and Incredibles 2
I'll be real with you,I don't think Toy Story 4 is a "great movie" besides the fact about it added no real value, Bopeep treated Woody like an absolute jerk and yet Woody abandoned his whole family and Bonnie for Bopeep. Also Woody got sad because Bonnie didn't play with him for a whole 3 days which in that same third day of no playing, there's a scene with Bonnie playing with Woody and Forky and that's even more BS because that means Woody abandoned Bonnie because of 2 days with no playing, Hell Woody promised Buzz at the end of Toy Story 2 that he wouldn't leave Buzz's side even after being done played with Andie for good. And for more inconsistency Buzz was made out to be a smart intelligent problem solver but for some reason they degraded him in Toy Story 4 by making him some babbling dumbass who just presses his chest buttons just to figure out problems, The movie advertises that the whole original Toy Story cast that you've grown up with will take a large role in the movie when they only sit on their asses in a car for most of it. I'm just sharing my opinion that if I will be honest,Toy Story 4 is one of, if not the most horrible Pixar movie of all. The characters are ruined,the plot is inconsistent,theres too many coincidences that lead the toys to progress through the plot and the only thing that has this movie running barely is it's music and visuals but visuals and music doesn't make a movie good,if the plot isn't stable in any compacity then the movie shouldn't be given the role of great. But that's just my thoughts.
Woody and Buzz are degraded into utter buffons in order to make Bo and Gabby into #GirlBosses.
It's the only reason why Bo's dress was redesigned to be soft material instead of porcelain, why she's suddenly hyper competent and able to parkour her way arround the playback. It's also why Woody gave away his voice box to Gabby, so she could get what she wanted. Like she was thr villian on the movie and she gets what she wants in the end ffs. >.>
@@BrightWulph I was shocked when I saw how BoPeep's face was "redesigned and updated" - Disney really wanted to slide in the fact that Pixar is theirs' by giving BoPeep the 'Elsa face' treatment - don't get me started on her retconned personality 🙄
@@jessoliveiro8975 Oh yeah, don't think I didn't notice Bo being given Elsa's face. ISTG, if it's not on purpose or trying to make the design more "appealing" for toy marketing, I sware that Disney is starting to suffer from same-face syndrome. Like all of their characters have to look the same. XO
Couldn't agree more, when I first saw the movie's ending, I was upset. Not because it was sad to see Woody and Buzz separate, but because Woody and Buzz separating ruined Woody's whole character. Everything you mentioned I totally agree with, 100% I can't even enjoy Toy Story 4 as a movie because it takes place after when the series had an intended conclusion.
I fully agree about Buzz but don’t entirely agree about Woody. He still cared about Bonnie and did everything to make her happy by helping her create Forky and making Forky stick around. Hell, he risked his life and sacrificed his voice box (which made him a lot less desirable as a toy to kids) to get him back for her before he left because his job was done. He could either spend the next few years gathering dust in a closet while being depressed and having no purpose or stay with his old girlfriend who clearly missed him (but kinda sucked sometimes) and can help lost toys find owners. At the end of the day, he could never recapture that passion for being an owned toy like he was with Andy and I like the old man miserable Woody we got in 4. They even reference the fact that he’s been around since the 50’s.
Not helping matters is that they waited way too long make any sequels, especially the Incredibles.
I like to think of toy story 4 as just a really fun project the animators wanted to do, lore wise i dont acknowledge it
I swear the animation was the single actually good thing about that movie
Toy Story 4 was nothing more than a cash grab for Disney.
In actuality, Bonnie was just going through a phase with Woody. When she really wanted him from Andy, it was because Woody was a brand new aspect of imagination for her. But after a while, she became bored with Woody, rather quickly. Something, all youths tend to do.
Next video: Why Dreamworks Sequels Work
Heck YEASH!!!
I feel like Toy Story 5 will be cancelled unless they have a really amazing idea because people keep complaining? Yes I thought that toy story 4 was a good ending, but I was thrilled for more Toy Story.
Toy Story 4 was a forced ending that undid all the previous movies
@@BabyGirlTiny good point, perhaps now they’ve trying to undo Toy Story 4 with toy story 5
Cars was a HUGE part of my childhood
I will never shut up about this but lightyear seems like a film Andy would see with his gf/wife and go "Eh I like the original better" and leave the theater ashamed.
I guess Disney and Pixar's approach to sequels can be summed up by this quote by the crab man himself, Schaffrillas Productions:
"Disney makes sequels for money. Pixar makes sequels for money. DreamWorks makes sequels for ART."
And for money pretty soon
@@volvoman5262 Yep. 👍
(Hey, you know the quote! Nice.)
May Chris and Patrick rest in peace
Finding Dory was good sequel
Cars 2 is the Attack of the Clones and Halo 5 and Pixar.
Though the attack of the clones part is funny because The last Jedi and The rise of Skywalker exists.
@@matthewmorvillo8662 The Last Jedi is a excellent movie! Rian Jhonson made a great movie!
No, more like Cars 2 is the Indiana Jones: Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull of Pixar movies. Oof
Finding Dory was even better than the first one in my opinion. And I watched the first with 5 years and the sequel with 20 years
ima gonna be honest, i actually liked Cars 2 more than Cars 3. Unpopular Opinion.
that fine and I won't judge you
Same. I consider Cars 2 to be the best Cars movie while I consider Cars 3 to be the weakest Cars movie. Cars 3 isn’t bad, it’s just weak compared to the other 2.
Cars 2 for me is a guilty pleasure. At least they tried to be unique and the movie is quite fun if u shut down your brain. But if there's something I would say, it definitely has more soul than most sequels lately.
Me too but only for Nostalgia because i'm a stupid zoomer with a 0.000000000000000001 nano second attention span
I'll give you this. It is an unusual opinion.
My issue with Incredibles 2 was the villain's backstory. Her father had a phone, which could contact the heroes, outside his safe room. When the house was being burglarized, he went to his safe room. He left the safe room to call the heroes, only to be murdered. This resulted in the villain wanting all superheroes to disappear... It's not the murderer's fault for killing the father, it's the hero's fault because the father wanted to call them...
That’s the point.
Pixar and Disney: WE GOT TO HAVE MONEY 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰🤑
I kinda disagree with Cars 3 here, but I agree that Toy Story 4 and The Incredibles 2 are terrible, and don't get me started with Toy Story 5, i think it's pointless to make more Toy Story film at this point
Toy Story 4 is a excellent movie! I was moved at the end of the film!
@@SuperPlacido1 nah, Toy Story 4 is just a cash grab, well, technically all sequel are cash grab but good sequel like Cars 3, Terminator 2, Top Gun Maverick have lots of thought and care put into it, so that's why those sequel aren't called cash grab because they are made with high level of care and thoughts, Toy Story 4 on the other hand is just a cash grab from the start, because when 2018 started, Pixar began to lose or running out of idea, so what they gonna do next for 2018 movie season, yeah, make a sequel to The Incredibles and Toy Story trilogy, but, The Incredibles 2 could have been great if it's not have been a copy of the original 2004 movie, instead of just swapping Bob for Helen, they could make the story about Dash and Violet age up becoming young adults with Bob and Helen in their 50s, that would have been much better and more interesting stories than just swapping Bob for Helen for literally the same story in the sequel we got, plus, The Incredibles 2 have no mention of Syndrome at all, one of Pixar best villain which make the sequel feel disconnected from the original Incredibles, of course, the point still stand that The Incredibles 2 have more potential to becoming a good sequel than Toy Story 4, because clearly, Toy Story 3 already taken that role as a finale to Toy Story trilogy, and now Pixar is greenlighting Toy Story 5 just for another cash grab if they make it similar to Toy Story 4
@@curious5887 Personally, I really liked Toy Story 4! I found the reunion between Woody and Bo Peep touching. Bo Peep brought an interesting point of view. What happens to the abandoned toys? I hope we will see her again in the next movie!
@@SuperPlacido1 well, clearly if you like it, fine, but it’s still doesn’t excuse the problem with the movie, being a cash grab installment, and it clearly contradict anything that Toy Story 3 had established
@@curious5887 We can say that about any movie! (That it's cash grap) And how does that contradict Toy Story 3?
I feel like one of the reason that Disney Pixar is kept making sequel, is that the "what's next" to the plot of the movie leading to the people asking what happened to this character, or what's next on this movie, I wanna know the next chapter, something like that and yes I'm one of that people.
Toy Story 2 & 3 were good. Going beyond that was the bad idea.
Pixar Sequels / Prequels & Spin-offs Ranked:
01: Toy Story 3 🌟
02: Toy Story 2 🌟
03: Incredibles 2 ✅
04: Toy Story 4 ✅
05: Cars 3 ✅
06: Monsters University ⚠️
07: Finding Dory ⚠️
08: Lightyear ⛔️
09: Cars 2 ⛔️
Overall - I enjoy Pixar sequels more than most, but Pixar outside of the Toy Story franchise, works better with standalone stories.
Why you do not like Lightyear?
Toy Story 4: 💩
Just my 2 cents, but Incredibles 2, Cars 3 and Toy Story 4 are all rubbish, and Cars 2 deserves to be up a rank. Monsters University in my opinion should be in the number 4 spot. Thing about Cars 2 is yes, it has a lot of problems, but it IS at least fun and memorable, I even now remember most scenes in the movie. At the very least, Cars 2 is so bad that it is ironically good. Cars 3’s worst sin is being forgettable. I can’t remember half the scenes in it. The pacing was horrible too, I almost fell asleep several times while watching it, and the new characters are just not fun characters nor interesting ones either.
@@truekiropfan8329 Cruz is a great character! Maybe it's too childish for you Cars! That could be another reason why you don't like these movies! Is it possible? And what didn't you like about Toy Story 4 and The Incredibles 2?
@@HarryJSmith Toy Story 4 is shit.
Incredibles 2 is an underrated movie in my opinion.
Agree.
Why was Monster's University not mentioned?! Yeah, I guess it's technically a prequel, but should have been briefly mentioned.
Curious, you mention Shrek 2, Puss in Boots 2, Toy Story (of course), and Shrek 3 is obviously bad. But what are your opinions on Shrek 4?
Someone once said that Lightyear is more like the movie Andy watched as an adult and went “What happened to this series?”.
I don't know if it's necessarily applies to toy story as the series is now, but I suspect that will change. Great video though.
Cars 2 ruined The Cars Franchise but Cars 3 redeemed the franchise
Bruh come on, I don’t get the Cars 1 movie hate. Its honestly pretty solid, nowhere near as good as let’s say Ratatouille or Wall-E, but good nonetheless. Good animation, great voice acting, good story/message, likable characters, great music and a brilliant ending. Sure the world doesn’t make sense but that doesn’t take me out of the movie at all. The other two are shit tho I’ll admit to that 🗿
2 is pretty bad I agree but 3 has a lot of weight and it's like they actually tried, they even tried to undo the damage of 2 as if it didn't happen and shift back the focus to mqueen and even give Sally a notable presence it's like it was the actual sequel to the 1st movie and not some spin off movie that lacks actual substance. I even like some of the newer aditions like Cruz and the older race cars and the ending I feel was the best way to finish it i think compared to the unused ones
@@nightwish1453 In some ways I agree. Ngl I was hella hyped back when cars 3 came out in 2017, but even tho it was better than 2 I left with a sour taste in my mouth with how it ended. I felt sad not being able to see Mcqueen get his big win over Storm. Cruz winning makes sense, but would've preferred Lightning to win. Also there's a deleted scene showing what it would've looked like if Mcqueen won and tbh its a much more wholesome and emotional ending more me.
@@timbuktoofat I think the issue of Mqueen winning is that it kind of just throws Cruz over the bus. I think having it so that the race starts with mqueen but ends with Cruz is the best way to do it. the other versions make it hard to route for both competing eachother or the character development was wrapped up too quickly, or the one in charge of rusteez sees the potential in cruz not mqueen is a bit iffy. the basic one where mqueen just wins while fine is a bit too predictable and kind of unrealistic against storm for that matter
I think what ultimately killed Incredibles 2, was the hype. I still really enjoyed it, and I've watched it numerous times since, but fans (myself included) came up with so many theories and ideas, and speculation, that it turned the sequel into something it could never live up to, and that made me really sad... never mind the fact that Incredibles is one of the best films ever made... I guess I just miss going blindly into a film, and being taken for a ride. The sequel definitely had a weaker story... but the hype was the deathblow.
That said... it's clear you don't like films that deviate from the "main" character's story-arc. That's fine, but you must know that doesn't inherently make a film bad. I've watched Cars 2 quite a few times, and maybe it's because I enjoy Larry the Cable Guy's spoof films like "Health Inspector" but it really is a fun film, that really expands Mater as a character... albeit, in a rather extravagant way.
I'm sorry you don't really enjoy films that expands a "side" character story, but that doesn't make a film bad... you just don't like films about side characters... again, that's fine, but you need to isolate those things. Case in point, your opinion of "Finding Dory." The sequels work, they just don't tell a story you want to hear... and to that I say, to each their own."
But back to Incredibles 2. Certainly the story was weaker than the original, but what you deduce, didn't actually happen in the first one. Hellen never got her chance to be the vigilante while Bob never stayed home and "settled down" like he wanted. Not that they didn't get their moments, which were great... but it was just that... a moment.
We don't know the full extent of why Supers were outlawed, or for that matter, how they came to be in the first place... but that's where the sequel shines, in many ways. You see, while society might be accepting in the moment after the Omnidroid, it wouldn't take long after that to go right back to hating Supers... though maybe hate is the wrong word... but they've certainly made the decision as a global society, that the Benefits of Supers, are far outweighed by the Costs.... society tends not to be that forgiving, and it's clear they were wronged by literally all Supers in the past. That's where Winston and Evylin come in. It's apparent that discussions are happening about reversing the decision, and we have one sibling "for" while the other is "against" Supers... and honestly, Evylin's reasoning isn't wrong... and crucially, the "justice" she is served... isn't what Syndrome got... she's still out there somewhere... and that's terrifying in so many ways.
In many ways Incredibles 2 faired worse, because it was too real. The struggles Bob faces at home are what any parent must deal with, and going from a workoholic to a primary-caregiver is a huge amount of whiplash... goodness, I cried when he told Dash he'd figured out his math. Eventually though, they both get what they craved in Incredibles opening dialogue... Hellen gets to be the vigilante saving the world, while maintaining her deep connection to raising her kids... that thing her younger self didn't believe she needed. Meanwhile Bob realizes just how much being the "hero" occupied his ego, in an equally unhealthy way... he learned he didn't know anything about his own kids needs. Hellen was always "I'll fight if I absolutely have to" and Bob was "I'll take care of the kids, if I must" basically in denial of their other desires and duties. By the end of Incredibles 2, they have found a balance and peace, which didn't exist but for an instant, in Incredibles...(nevermind the journey Violet and Dash go on... those arcs could be a video in themselves)... but it's just beautiful.
I love your channel and content, but I think you missed the mark on this video. Like I said, everyone has their own preferences, and you make yours quite clear... and that's great! Nothing wrong with that... we're all entitled to our own opinions. My only point is these "broken" sequels might not be as broken as you think they are.
Have a wonderful day my friend!
His opinion about Finding Dory does not seem like a fully realized opinion. He says nothing about what makes Finding Dory specifically a bad sequel, and if it does anything wrong that were or were not already done in Cars 2. Aldone really needs to watch Finding Dory again. I see what you are saying about his talk on that film only amounting to not liking films about side characters in general. 😭Even though Finding Dory actually did a much better job at expanding on the story of Dory, and it served the overall story of Finding Nemo, contenting on the themes and tradition of Dory and Nemo teaching Marlin to try new things and be brave like them.
I do not understand this! Aldone is not giving Finding Dory a fair evaluation if he says it is another great sequel, but still discredits and disregards it for doing what Cars 2 did with Mater, while not giving Finding Dory the credit that it really truly deserves for doing a much better job with Dory than with Mater, and maintaining a reason for Dory to serve Marlin and Nemo's story, and for Marlin and Nemo to serve Dory's story. If he did not review it yet just because he wants to avoid talking about Ellen Degeneres, then I do not know why he has not already talked about what kind of sequel it is in his opinion. That is why Aldone needs to re-watch this for its own review!
I live with the fear they make a Ratatouille sequel
I live with the thought that Toy Story 4 never existed and Toy Story 3 was the end of the movies.
I wasn't able to fully grasp what about Toy Story 4 (as a supporter for TS4 being a good movie) made it feel like it doesn't continue the story well. And it's because the story revolved around Andy and I never had the words for it. The story is complete at the end because Andy's journey with his toys (and growing up) has ended and the story is told. However, I will say that's the thing about TS4 that I love. It shifts the focus to the one toy who's world revolved around making sure Andy was a happy kid. What does that toy do now? Make the new owner, Bonnie, happy? Sure but Bonnie is a young kid and her emotions are all over the place. The cowboy was cool for a couple days when she first found him but she just found her other toys more in line with her tastes. Hell, her new favorite toy is a spork. I adore the deconstruction of those emotions and how your meaning in life can't be supported by somebody else's happiness. It's learning how to be in a healthy relationship and that your happiness has to come from you. Sure the execution isn't perfect (looking at the buzz plot even though it just occurred to me how it's relevant to the plot) but it's a thematically important movie that utilizes our familiarity of the character and the depth in which we understand his life's purpose. I know it ruins the trilogy but I see 4 as the epilogue since there was something left to be said that doesn't revolve around the heart of the whole story but it does involve important characters. You don't have to watch 4 and the trilogy is perfect on its own. 4 says something tho that I feel couldn't have been better said without the build up of this character. And learning that there's a 5 in the making is really frustrating. There *is* no where left for this story to go. 4 pushed the limits and I let it slide (and it proved itself to me) but 5?!?! I can't even think of a phony plot.
Anyways, thanks for putting into words why TS is a trilogy with an epilogue. Tangent over.
Can you do video why DreamWorks Sequel Works?
9:55, Tron:Uprising was way better than Tron:Legacy. (Don’t get me wrong, I think Legacy was pretty good (though not as good as the original Tron movie) but Uprising eclipses it entirely.)
When Pixar first started, it was a fledgling young studio, now that it's mainstream, it's now just another studio being run as a business, where everything has to make money, and everyone involved wants in on the jackpot. As a result, I see Pixar, like Disney, are cash grabbing using nostalgia and established content to maximise profits, this is why their films are rehashes and reboots, it's easier and cheaper to produce films this way, however, studios should not be run as if they are mills. I think it was telling that Pixar did not win best animated feature during the Oscars or Golden Globes, that went to Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio, which was creative, artistic and a passionate story, Turning Red and Cars are the only Pixar films that did not win best animated film, it would be nice if Pixar could animate a film as awesome as del Toro's Pinocchio, but in the end, I have better alternatives, such as Studio Ghibli and Cartoon Saloon.
Actually, Monsters, Inc, Incredibles 2 (regardless of your thoughts on the film), Onward and Luca ALSO didn’t win Best Animated Feature at the either the Golden Globes or Academy Awards.
Toy Story 3 and Incredibles 2 were actually great sequels
And also Toy Story 2
This has nothing to do with pixar but The Lego Movie 2 was actually EXTREMELY close to the First Lego Movie in terms of how good the movie was
I agree with you. I would say that Toy Story 2, 3, and Incredibles 2 are easily the best sequels Pixar has ever made. If you don’t mind me asking who do you think is the greatest director in the history of Pixar?
I agree man
People keep dissing Cars for no reason, this guy’s no exception. What do you mean “Good by their standards”? This movie is just as good as the other movies before it like Toy Story, Monsters Inc, and Finding Nemo.
Exactly I don’t know why they downplay the Cars franchise so much
The 2 Toy Story sequels worked. We'll just pretend that 4th movie never happened
I liked cars 2
Same
I grew up with it, so I will just give credit for the awesome effects and designs.
same
Same.
Pixar’s trying to be dreamworks. Even before puss and boots, dreamworks was good with sequels, from king fu panda and how to train your dragon. Pixar’s model used to be making new and original films with little sequels except for toy story (and maybe monsters university, tho that is a prequel). I just think pixar either needs to stay in their lane or get better at the sequel game
How fantastic
No way he just dissed Cars 3 💀
Get focken rekt bruv
he doesn't actually mention cars 3 at all, I feel 3 is left under a radar because of 2 which is understandable and despite the minor efforts in 3 that subtly pretend 2 didn't happen the 3 can initally give out a turn off
@@nightwish1453 oh, I just saw it in the thumbnail and assumed he dissed it.
I honestly loved Cars 3. In my opinion it shouldn't have been in the thumbnail.
@@josephsantiago2862 Yeah, that’s what I thought
List of My Good Pixar Sequels:
1. Toy Story 2
2. Toy Story 3.
3. Toy Story 4
4. Monsters University
5. Finding Dory.
6. Cars 3.
I like all three Cars movies same thing with Toy Story!
Tron Legacy, you a sequel is great when it gets a whole fucking world in Kingdom Hearts.
All toy story are great
I'm glad someone else also pointed out Toy story 4 just ruined what toy story 3 in the ending and I hated lightyear its obvious cash grab attempt on and star command series and movie is alot better.
Yeah some of these squeals just ruin what made original movies good and message.
Yeah looks at disney/pixar its obvious what direction they are going with lousy live action and cash grab on squeals they don't care about quality thats why I'm looking at dreamworks they at least care original movies.
Incredibles 2 is extremely underrated
If that’s the case, Cars is extremely overhated.
wait wait wait. we need a Toy Story TV show season 1, 2 and 3. money money money!
I miss the movies that Pixar use to make!
8:18 That’s pretty much been my feeling towards Lightyear. I see it less as the movie that would’ve made Andy a fan, and more like a franchise reboot that original fans like him would’ve detested and rejected.
You really need to study cars it was an amazing movie that was a passion project from the information the story and even the cast Cars gives a powerful story about caring about your friends and family rather than yourself cars was so damn good it almost won the Oscar I honestly think Cars is up there with Up and finding Nemo
Toy story 5 is gonna be bad Toy story 3 should’ve been the last sequel to the movie.
We do not know before seeing it!
@@SuperPlacido1 ehh i could be wrong
@@ClimbingDetails100 Let's hope together that you are wrong! Let's keep our fingers crossed!
I thought Incredibles 2 was a great movie. My only issue with the movie was that they could’ve done more with the villain
Hot Take: I Actually Love Toy Story 4. Heck, It Honestly Has More Finality Than 3. But I Respect Your Guys' Opinions.
GREAT INTERESTING VIDEO PIXAR MOVIES 🎥
Meanwhile Toy Story 2 and 3 exist
Unpopular opinion: I loved Toy Story 4. I didn’t expect to enjoy it, but I was pleasantly surprised. I don’t think we needed it though, and we definitely don’t need Toy Story 5.
People should stop dissing Cars 3, It's a really good movie and a much better sequel than Cars 2.