"Cars" DTV Spinoff "Planes" Officially Announced

[AerostarMonk]

Welp. (http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/disney-cues-direct-dvd-cars-spin-planes-24837)



DisneyToon Studios Announces Planes
An all-new high-flying feature-length comedy adventure
with a fleet of fun new characters

BURBANK, Calif. – February 17, 2011 – The sky’s the limit as DisneyToon Studios proudly announces PLANES, a spectacular, full-length CG-animated comedy action adventure movie for everyone set high above the world of CARS. PLANES will introduce an entirely original and hilarious crew of daredevils from every corner of the globe and draws inspiration from the immensely popular Disney•Pixar’s CARS world. PLANES will arrive on Blu-ray and DVD in Spring 2013.

“We had such a great time exploring the world of ‘Cars’ over the course of two films, so it seemed only natural for us to see where our imaginations would take us in a film where planes were the main characters. By expanding the Cars world, ‘Planes’ gave us a whole new set of fun-filled situations and a great opportunity to introduce some fantastic new characters.” commented John Lasseter, Chief Creative Officer, Walt Disney and Pixar Animation Studios. “The team at DisneyToon Studios has done such an amazing job creating a heartfelt story filled with great comedy, adventure, and emotion. I know audiences are going to love taking off into the wild blue yonder with these daredevil characters, as they experience a whole new kind of animated adventure.”
PLANES takes off with an international cast of the fastest air racers around, in a comedy packed with action and adventure starring Dusty, a small town dreamer who longs to enter the most epic around-the-world air race … despite his fear of heights. With the help and support of a fleet of new and hilarious characters, Dusty wings his way into the biggest challenge of his life.
Fasten your seatbelt; more information on PLANES will be arriving shortly.


So much for not putting out inferior DTV sequels. And I don't think I'm making a snap judgment here. The lead time on this one is even shorter than any other film they've done. It doesn't seem to be coming from anyone directly involved with the original and it's DTV.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But this news does not bode well.

What are your thoughts?

[Choppasmith]

It's not an actual Pixar film, it's just a DTV set in the Cars universe. Personally I really don't care, let Disney bank on Cars' popularity as long as Pixar focuses on new Feature Films, what's the harm?

[AerostarMonk]

It's not an actual Pixar film, it's just a DTV set in the Cars universe. Personally I really don't care, let Disney bank on Cars' popularity as long as Pixar focuses on new Feature Films, what's the harm?

I'm aware of where it's coming from and who it involves. Where's the harm? This is exactly the kind of thing Lasseter vowed to put a stop to when he first stepped in. The entire Disney/Pixar deal pretty much revolved around preventing stuff like this from happening and not even a full decade later it's happening.

I'm jumping the gun on this one. But it just rubs me the wrong way. For now I'll just sit back and wait for more details.

[Ed Liu]

The announcement says that it's DisneyToon Studios doing it, and they're the ones behind the Tinker Bell movies. That's probably just on a technical level, though, and even the worst of the DTV sequels usually had pretty good animation. However, it is also worth pointing out that Disney never really stopped doing animated DTVs since Tinker Bell has been coming out once a year for 3 years running now, and I think those movies are pretty good. Not great, but I don't really think Cars is as insanely great as the other Pixar movies either.

In any event, the big change between the cheapquels and these things really boils down to John Lasseter, and he's got enough of a track record by now that this is good enough for me despite the "no sequels" announcement. I always read that as "no BAD sequels" anyway ;).

[Choppasmith]

I'm aware of where it's coming from and who it involves. Where's the harm? This is exactly the kind of thing Lasseter vowed to put a stop to when he first stepped in. The entire Disney/Pixar deal pretty much revolved around preventing stuff like this from happening and not even a full decade later it's happening.

I'm jumping the gun on this one. But it just rubs me the wrong way. For now I'll just sit back and wait for more details.

I see what you're saying but judging from the article, It's got Lasseter's stamp of approval, both as the head of Animation AND as the main guy behind Cars. If anything, I think Lasseter's just being a bit favorable toward Cars.

Like I said, while this was probably thought of as a quick cash grab, it certainly doesn't sound like the cheap DTVs of yore.

EDIT


I always read that as "no BAD sequels" anyway

That's how I interpreted it as well.

[theblackhatclub]

You realize John Lasseter is not the top dog at Disney. He has a board of directors he has to answer to. When he took over he wanted to dump the Tinkerbell dtv movies. The board said no, this will sale a bunch of dolls to little girls, so it's getting done with or without you. The same with Cars, a sequal was made because Cars toys sell like hotcakes. Artistic integrity, or not Disney's 1st goal is to make money.

[AerostarMonk]

It just seems rather, well, I don't want to say crass. But I know there were a number of DTV films in the works that were kiboshed because of the no more cheapquels thing that still would've been under Lasseter anyway.

I know that Meet The Robinsons didn't light the box office on fire but I don't think it was any less profitable than Brother Bear, and that got a sequel. So the rumored Robinsons sequel would've been under him and it still never moved forward.

Not to mention all the other productions that were just completely obliterated without much of a second thought, feature or otherwise, while Planes soars on?

So even if it meant no bad sequels, this still seems like a complete 180 from procedures up to this point. Tinker Bell notwithstanding. From what I hear production on that was so far along that they just couldn't eat the loss at the time and it just ended up working out for them.

It also seems like dilution of the brand. Why isn't this coming from Pixar Canada? They've been dabbling in Cars stuff since they've opened. It looks like a way to pass the buck if the entire thing goes south. Pixar comes out looking great while Disney looks like greedy vultures who botched a franchise that many already feel is a bit mediocre.

Though as I've previously stated, I'm jumping to conclusions before all the pieces are even in place. I don't think this is much good for either Disney or Pixar when it comes to the older set in the long run. But when it comes to the target demo, this is a rather clever move indeed. I can't fault a business for being pretty good at what it aims to do, especially if it's not hurting anyone, even when I don't necessarily agree with it.

So I guess I defer to Choppasmith and say, no harm done.

[Peter Paltridge]

Eisner, cut that out! It's not nice to possess Lasseter's body!

[Light Lucario]

Well, I didn't see this one coming, especially when there's little information around the Cars sequel at this point. Cars is obviously a financial success, both with the movie and the toys, which is why it was able to get those Car-toons segments, the sequel and apparently this spin-off. I can't really pass judgment on this given the little information on it, but considering that Cars is my least favorite Pixar movie so far, I'm not sure if I'll really check it out. Maybe once more information about it comes out, I'll be more interested in this spin-off movie.

[Ed Liu]

You realize John Lasseter is not the top dog at Disney. He has a board of directors he has to answer to. When he took over he wanted to dump the Tinkerbell dtv movies. The board said no, this will sale a bunch of dolls to little girls, so it's getting done with or without you. The same with Cars, a sequal was made because Cars toys sell like hotcakes. Artistic integrity, or not Disney's 1st goal is to make money.
But it's always been Pixar's stance that quality is the best business plan. We may never know the full inside story of Tinker Bell (it's been mostly unconfirmed rumors from multiple anonymous sources), but the reality of that is that the first movie does not seem to have any resemblance to the one described when it was going to have Brittany Murphy voicing Tinker Bell (http://www.zap2it.com/movies/news/zap-brittanymurphytinkerbellcasting,0,1288423.story). Even if Disney's board or whoever essentially forced the Tinker Bell movies on Lasseter, the final results were an eminently watchable movie that was infinitely better than almost anything out of the DTV sequels division. He took a potential lemon and turned it into a pretty drinkable glass of lemonade that's been getting better as it goes.

The need for a second movie to capitalize on Cars merchandising success is also unnecessary. The stuff has been selling terrific all on its own (http://www.toonzone.net/news/articles/36346/cars-passes-8-billion-in-sales-cast-and-crew-discuss-cars-2) without the sequel. If all they were interested in was more merchandising opportunities, they could have just designed new cars and released them as toys and skipped the new movie, or pumped out a cheapquel a long time ago.


I know that Meet The Robinsons didn't light the box office on fire but I don't think it was any less profitable than Brother Bear, and that got a sequel. So the rumored Robinsons sequel would've been under him and it still never moved forward.

The timeline makes those decisions more consistent. Brother Bear made $85.3M (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=brotherbear.htm) in 2003; MtR made $97.8M (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=meettherobinsons.htm) in 2007. I'd say that MtR did substantially better than Brother Bear no matter how you crunch those numbers. However, Brother Bear 2 came out in August 2006, but the Disney/Pixar merger was announced that January and completed by May 2006. I think BB2 was all but done by the time the merger happened, so that's just a case of taking a resource that was already finished and pushing it out, with a best-case that you get a little cash and a worst-case that you get a tax writeoff. It's a choice of a little return on investment rather than no return on investment. It's also why studios release all those really horrible movies in the January to March/April timeframe. If they had faith they'd make anything substantial back, they'd have released them during the Thanksgiving to Christmas window.

MtR was released well after the merger, and I remember that it was the first Disney film that Lasseter had any input in (and I have to say I was disappointed in how the movie shamelessly recycled the whole "big head, tiny arms" T-Rex gag from Toy Story). If there were ever thoughts for a sequel, it can't have gotten past the earliest development stages. They didn't even have a book to fall back on because I don't think there's a second "Robinsons" book. I don't think Lasseter killed a sequel in the same way he'd have killed Brother Bear 2, because I can't believe there was a lot there to begin with.

All that being said, I can't say that I'm terribly excited about Planes as a concept. Mostly I'm willing to give Disney and Pixar the benefit of the doubt because they've earned a lot more trust over the past few years based on the movies they've released.

[Peter Paltridge]

(and I have to say I was disappointed in how the movie shamelessly recycled the whole "big head, tiny arms" T-Rex gag from Toy Story).
Toy Story wasn't the first cartoon to make a joke about Tyrannosauruses having tiny arms, and it won't be the last. It was hardly stolen.

MtR is so disjointed because Lasseter came in halfway through it -- they could only alter half the movie. Thus you get heartfelt moments in one scene and CRAZY! CRAZY! CRAZY! in the next. I wish it was better.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I don't think sequels are necessarily bad but this does not sound promising. A spinoff of Pixar's worst film, done in a short time frame with a lower budget, with the simplistic hook of switching Cars with planes. And it does seem a bit merchandising driven because it would be pretty easy to hang a whole new "Planes" toyline on this franchise.

[Spaceman]

Pretty groan-worthy, but I'm not scared yet for Pixar's future. Cars is already a cashcow franchise, and this is a cold yet perfectly logical extension of it's success.

If they make Pixar-less DTVs for any other Pixar film, then I'll slam the panic button.

[Shawn Hopkins]

You know, they made a Buzz Lightyear cartoon series. I think the myth of Pixar avoiding sequels and spinoffs has always been exaggerated. They've just been able to avoid really bad, like Shrek 3 bad, sequels and spinoffs.

This has the potential to break that trend, though. A plane named Dusty that's afraid of heights. I've been in small town writer's clubs and college screenwriting classes and that's exactly the kind of thing you'd get from one of those. There was this guy in my screenwriting class writing a script about a black Confederate Civil War general. It was a comedy. I could just see Martin Lawrence in the lead.

[Hordesman]

Cars is the closest thing Pixar has to franchise fare, because it made its real money in merchandise. From what I understand, it wasn't a flop but it didn't quite meet some of the BO expectations, especially overseas which is why- surprise! That's why part 2 is a globe hopping adventure. Pixar runs a tight ship but they're still answerable to the board, same as any division.

[Kool345]

I'm not really sure this will work as well. Cars was a huge success. I really enjoyed Cars, but now much info is given on Cars 2 yet, so I am not sure how far Disney will take this project quite yet. As well, I'm not sure if I'll like Cars 2 or not, so this is a halfway in the middle point for me right now.

[trance2009]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=78589


Prepare for a look at the world of the other racial faction in the Cars universe.

[the greenman]

Two years away. I wonder if its the official sequel to Cars 2.

[Mandouga]

Let me guess, this is a spinoff in a similar vein to how the three Tinker Bell movies are a Peter Pan "spinoff".

However, this is a spinoff of a Pixar creation. What does John Lasseter think? Obviously Pixar isn't making it, but do they have ANY input? At all? Either way, I just don't know. 2013 is two years off, and anything can happen during that time.

Still, it looks like Disney meant what they said when they talked about doing spinoffs instead of more sequels. In any case, after reading the description in the article, this could really go either way. That said, I'm willing to give it a chance.

[Ed Liu]

Merging the new thread with the original one, since it seems like there's a lot of the same discussion happening again.

[NovelleX]

Bleh, what's next? ''Boats" ? :shrug:

[Dr.Pepper]

It looks kind "meh, whatever" to me. I will probably rent it but I don't have high hopes for it.