is pixar milking cars?

[zombie711]

For thouse of you who dont know Car has recevied a sequel. This is a bit concerning.
A little backstory. around the time the first toy story was being made, the movie's plot was bery different, It was about a boy having to leave for college and having his toys at home left to wounder what would become of them. For thouse of you who have seen the Toy story
trilogy, you would know that this is the plot to toy story three. The reason for this was that Pixar believed their original plot while good didnt have you care for any of the characters because your suppose to fell bad for them so early on. Because of this they made two very good films to create a connection with the characters.

But cars now has a sequel and I very muched puzzled why. I mean, It hase the lowest ratting on rotten tomatoes Ive seen for a pixar movie(to put you mind into perspective the user rating for cars is lower that the user rating for transformers 2). Add to the fact that they made this

and

 

[Lukeje]

That title just gave me the strangest mental image... Anyway. If it's making money, then why shouldn't they? There are evidently people clamouring for more.

 

[Kakashi on crack]

Of course their milking the franchise, but when sales are so bad right now, and its very easy to lose profit, can you really blame them?

I'm not saying its right, but if you've noticed, a lot of companys have been strip mining, if you may, franchises for profit because they can't afford to lose profit on something new and original.

 

[Furioso]

The decision to include Larry the Cable Guy in any movie raises red flags, in cars 2 he was the star, are they milking the franchise? Yes. Could they have made an attempt of at least making the movie good? Yes. Did they? No.

 

[RatRace123]

While the first Cars wasn't a terrible movie (I'd go on record saying it was actually pretty enjoyable) it was still the worst Pixar movie.

But, it's a very marketable franchise, which is why it's being... well, marketed. It feels wrong to accuse a Pixar movie of being a cash grab toy commercial, but I'm sure that's what the intention of Cars 2 was.

 

[ZeroMachine]

Or, for fucks sake... who cares.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it doesn't matter if a franchise is milked if they release quality products.

I swear, the term "franchise milking" should be banned from the Escapist...

 

[Strain42]

I don't remember the exact source, but I believe this is something you could blame more on Disney than Pixar.

Once upon a time, Pixar and Disney had a sort of unwritten deal that Disney wouldn't force them to make sequels for the purposes of marketing and cash grabbing. So long as they made good films, Disney was happy.

But then Toy Story 3 made so much money (5th highest grossing film ever and #1 highest grossing animated film IIRC) and the merchandise for that flew off the shelves. Cars and Monsters, Inc. Also had good merchandise that sold well, and that's probably why they were opted for sequels.

So...I dunno, take what you will from it. I saw Cars 2 and enjoyed it. I'll probably even look into Planes.

 

[ZeZZZZevy]

I've stopped trying to understand child film companies for a while now.

But thank you for reminding me of the trailer that runs on tv, which includes what's perhaps the worst pun I've ever heard in my entire life.

ugh

 

[maninahat]

Not especially. They did two sequels to Toy Story first; films specifically about personified merchandise, and no one complained then. So it doesn't bother me that Cars gets a similar treatment. Apparently lots of people enjoed cars, so why deny them a sequel?

 

[faceless chick]

cars is bad.
the first movie is mediocre "worse-than-dreamworks-usual-fare" drivel.

it's my least favorite (close to hated) pixar movie. if i am to stat a bad movie made by them, it's this one.

so at first i was surprised that this shit-fest got so popular, then i caught on. it's car toys. with cool faces. for little boys.NOW it makes sense.
sorta like transformers, huh.

so they milked this series for...6 years now?
i think it out-sold anything else, really.

but the problem is, kids stay kids only for so long (unlike basement dwellers) so much of the original audience probably got too old for these toys.

so disney, being the heartless money-hungry corporation it now is, ordered more movies so they have a new generation of 5-year-old to milk. 5 year olds who look at wall-e and cars the same way, but would rather buy a lightning McQueen toy anyway.

more merchandise revenue!!!
everyone wins..except parents wallets, of course.

see you in 2050 when "cars 21: the fastening" comes out.
i called it first.

 

[OldKingClancy]

Yes they are, but...

If a bad Pixar movie means they can fund another great like Up or Toy Story I'm ok with it.

 

[Shameless]

Dude, Hollywood has been milking franchises before all of us were even born, so get over it and if you don't like the movie then don't see it.

 

[faceless chick]

Or, for fucks sake... who cares.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it doesn't matter if a franchise is milked if they release quality products.

I swear, the term "franchise milking" should be banned from the Escapist...

most milked series stop being good by the second movie.

also, "cars" and "quality" do not belong together in the same sentence.
cars was pixar's creativity dump.they knew they couldn't make it a good movie from the get-go. it looks like they aren't even TRYING with this one.

so franchise milking is the only way to describe these movies without using words that make the kids who love these movies cry.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Or, for fucks sake... who cares.

Well, obviously the original poster and several people in this topic.

 

[Dirzzit]

Disney is milking the franchise, pixar is just their *****. (Pardon my french)

 

[Sean Hollyman]

Planes?

What?

Are they making a new Disney Pixar movie?

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

For thouse of you who dont know Car has recevied a sequel. This is a bit concerning.
A little backstory. around the time the first toy story was being made, the movie's plot was bery different, It was about a boy having to leave for college and having his toys at home left to wounder what would become of them. For thouse of you who have seen the Toy story
trilogy, you would know that this is the plot to toy story three. The reason for this was that Pixar believed their original plot while good didnt have you care for any of the characters because your suppose to fell bad for them so early on. Because of this they made two very good films to create a connection with the characters.

But cars now has a sequel and I very muched puzzled why. I mean, It hase the lowest ratting on rotten tomatoes Ive seen for a pixar movie(to put you mind into perspective the user rating for cars is lower that the user rating for transformers 2). Add to the fact that they made this

and

Well, Cars toy sales has well surpassed FIVE BILLION DOLLARS, so I think Disney pressured Pixar to make this in exchange for making their original work's such as Wall-e and Up.

 

[Cap'n Ninja]

With the title's lack of capitalisation, I just got the strangest idea of Pixar milking a car.
Cars was successful, and more importantly, the merchandise was very popular. Disney noticed this, and the numbers came out that Cars 2 would be a profitable thing to extend, so they did. I wouldn't say that they are "milking" the concept, but they are using it to get a reliable source of money. Hopefully the critical backlash will show them a decrease in interest, and they'll tone it down or tail it off.

As for Transformers 2, remember that you had publications like The Sun and The Daily Mail reviewing it too. Those sorry excuses for newspapers do still technically count, and their readership is what they reviewed the film for.

 

[Shadu]

Yes, of course they are milking it. I mean, let's face it, it targets little boys who love cars and will drag their parents to see it because it is of their favorite characters. And when the movie is over, they will whine for the new toys because, well, they are new. In fact, the milking is the only reason, I believe, their worst movie got a sequel. It's all about the merchandising and money, and well, that's what they're getting.

 

[Rad Party God]

I don't have a grudge against Cars, I love every single movie from Pixar and yes, while Cars certainly wasn't the best Pixar movie, it's still a Pixar movie and lot much, much better than all the other CGI animation movies, even Disney's own. As for Pixar "milking" the franchise, c'mon, there are a lot of other shorties for their other movies, heck, Buzz Lightyear got his own (crappy) movie and after that, he got his very own (crappy) animated series. And almost every single of their movies has got a videogame at some point.

It's as if you're saying that (sorry for the comparisson) My Little Pony was made as a cash cow, because of it's legacy (?) of years and even decades of girly toys. If people want more from a particular thing and a lot of money is being made out from it, then there will be a lot more of that particular thing (in most cases). If it starts lowering in quality, then that's when you can start worrying, instead of wondering the "ifs" and "shoulds".