Rumor: Finding Nemo 2?

Yes I loved Three Musketeers! Does anyone know if the turtle narrator exisited before that movie? He's very funny.

But if a child is young enough, wouldn't their parents accompany them anyway? Plus, most parents don't care if their young kids see a PG movie (PG13 and up is where it gets a little chancey).

I don't care how subtle the jokes are; if Brad Bird thinks the world's going to liquify if he doesn't include those vulgar jokes in a movie, then maybe he should be solely a live-action director.

If you think those jokes were vulgar, I'd advise you to avoid MOST of almost any kind of entertainment today/.

I love Brad Bird and I see nothing wrong with the PG animated films he created with Pixar or the Iron Giant. In fact, their among my favorite absolute favorite films. Not everything needs to be a cynical cash grab like Cars 2. Let's face it. Yes, that did have a plot, but it removed all the charm of the original and it was basically created to sell toys.

I think the problem with Pixar is too little Brad Bird. He's a fantastic storyteller and wouldn't have stood for the sloppiness of Bug's Life, Wall-E or Brave. His films are layered, thoughtfully crafted and they fire on all cylinders. They're not intended for toddlers, but any innuendo they contain would go over their heads just as it does with classic Bugs Bunny cartoons.

Another Nemo is a boring idea. I'm sure they can pound-out a story, but why? Where has the Pixar imagination gone? Why not just put their collective heads together and find a new angle so they can revive Newt?

My sentiments exactly... except that I liked both WALL E and Brave.

Those films aren't bad, just not as finely crafted as Bird's efforts. Wall-E is a likable movie that gets kind of lost and preachy and even insensitive toward overweight people half-way through. Brave is beautiful and a great idea, but the storytelling seemed much more muddled, and almost like some of the lesser Disney movies, than the usual standards of Pixar. Something seems to be slipping there.

I can see what you mean on both accounts, I know that WALL

• E

• did receive a lot of negative criticism for the way it portrayed overweight stereotypes as being incredibly lazy and so overly dependent on conveniences as opposed to fending for themselves. Personally, I think it was one of Pixar's more "eye-candy" oriented movies, which seems to be most of what the positive reviews are based on.

I wish they'd use Wall-E for short subject cartoons. His early scenes in the film were so Charlie Chaplain-esque!

That wouldn't be a bad idea actually... it's been working for Toy Story.

I like the idea of using some of their characters in short subjects rather than full-length films. They should leave those to original ideas.

Andrew Stanton (director of Wall-E) has gone on record saying nowhere in the making of the film did he intend to inject his political agenda. The de-population of Earth is the only thing that makes the movie work. As for the 'overweight' complaint, that was a brilliant satire on how easy it is for humans to fall into a sedimentary lifestyle.

Again, just what kids need to see: scientists trying to get a booty call for a lizard! I'm glad that film never got made. And for those of you who think my opinions are narrow-minded, hear me now: I am fully aware that animation is not just for kids. But with the possible exception of Ralph Bakshi films, animated movies are primarily watched by small children. I don't care if the films were *made* for kids; they're still gonna watch them!

Not all the edges of entertainment need to be sanded off for kids. That's a parent's job and that's what ratings are for. I doubt you'll find many pleasing mainstream films that meet your restrictive criteria, but good luck with that.

I'm well versed on the intentions of Stanton and Pixar films in general. That does not mean that the themes come-off to all audience members as intended. My concerns about Wall-E were shared by many people. I make a point to eat well and exercise daily so it's doubtful that weight will be an issue for me, but anything is possible. Many of my close friends are challenged by weight and I did find portions of the film offensive to them.

You mean when humans turn into rocks?

I could go on a rant about how "prudish" kids entertainment has to be. Even Sesame Street had some under the radar moments. Every cartoon we ever watched (as long as it's not from the sterile 1970's) has stealth references, often overtly sexual. Animaniacs couldn't STOP making sexual references ("Finger Prince"... uh... hello?). I even saw an episode of Sam and Max that got away with 2 Prison Rape jokes. There was a Fat Albert episode about STD's. And I can direct that to anyone on hulu. Anyone see any cartoons from the 40'? Was that stuff ever even intended for kids?

Brad Bird shouldn't have to make films for people who are afraid of sex, nor should he have to censor himself because people think they know what's best for kids (who learn the most vulgar, vile things on the school yards anyway). And for the record, PG films, at least ones made before 2006, allowed for mild cussing. Nothing you wouldn't hear on an early episode of the Simpsons.

Wall*E's fat people wasn't so much about being sedentary, but they managed to sneak Sci-Fact into their Sci-Fi. It all has to do with bone loss in artificial gravity and in space. I remember seeing something, I think it was an anime... yeah. An Anime called Freedom (about a moon colony) where they were talking about osteoporosis in low gravity, and they managed to correct that (unlike what happened in Wall*e).

Sure, there is a little of it that has routes in our over reliance on technology, and that wraps up with the anti-runaway consumerist message of the film... but that's something that would supposedly happen. I give them credit for realism in that aspect.
EDIT:
Oh... uh... on topic to the first thing I said... yeah... you do not want to see what they hid in the DTV movie Garfield Gets Real.

Looks like the "rumor" is a rumor no longer, they're talking about Finding Nemo 2 for 2016 on the primetime entertainment news shows and what have you.

I wish they'd stop that "Picar untitled film that takes you inside the human mind" project and move this up. This is a 4 year wait. Ellen is in negotiations to reprise her role as Dory. She's clearly going to take it, considering she kept comedically whining about it when TS3 came out. There was a great bit with a Buzz Lightyear toy on her show about it.

Well, it takes a number of years just to complete these animated movies... four years sounds about right at the rate Pixar makes movies.

Durr... I keep forgetting that Dreamworks outsources a lot of its animation. That's how they get 2 or 3 movies out in a year. Had Monsters University came out this year, it would have been the first (and probably only) time we had more than one Pixar film in a year. They clearly didn't want that to go up against Twiblight.

Don't know if this has already been mentioned but, a spin-off of Cars, "Planes" is coming out. It looks sucky.

It almost seems like Pixar is currently over-committing themselves right now on movies they're wanting to do... they kind of sound like the way I've been for a while now: having more and more ideas and having little time to get them all done when wanted.

Hey, at least it's Direct-to-DVD.


....Just like that abomination The Oogieloves should be.