New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Edwin Davies: I don't think that either studio should start worrying yet since both have been on the up, both financially and creatively, over the last couple of years and this could very well be a blip, rather than the indication of a irreversible downward trend. If they can deliver good product then there is enough trust and name recognition there (particularly in the case of Pixar) to ensure that people will turn out.

In terms of why the two films mentioned have not done so well, I think there are different factors at play for both, but they both suffered from poor timing which led to a lack of demand. If Pixar really wanted to capitalise on the success of the first Cars they should have got the sequel out two or three years after the first, rather than six. As we've said before, that film existed as a way of extending the brand of the series rather than as a film in its own right, but it could have had a stronger domestic run if it had come out when the kids who saw the first Cars were still young enough that they would want to see the second one. Kids grow up and move on from things very quickly, and you can't guarantee that an equal or greater number of kids will come up to replace them and replenish the audience.

As for Puss In Boots, that film has been released at a bad time of year (being released a few weeks later or earlier really could have made a huge difference to the opening weekend and the final gross) but in a macro sense it has been released too late in the history of the Shrek franchise. The third and fourth Shrek films ate up a lot of goodwill for the series, so releasing Puss In Boots now rather than, say, between Shreks 3 and 4 or even 2 and 3 (this project was first announced just after Shrek 2 was released) meant that there was less demand for the character or an expansion of that world.

Jim Van Nest: I think the only reason either studio should start worrying is if these latest entries represent all we have to look forward to from them. And I think we all know that's a resounding "no." I still think Pixar simply made one for the kids with Cars 2 and by all accounts, Puss in Boots isn't bad...it just wasn't a smash hit. If sometime soon Pixar announces Cars 3: Mater Steals Your Wallet...then we might have to start worrying. Until then, they'll both bounce back just fine.

Kim Hollis: I don't believe either studio has much cause for alarm. For Pixar, Cars 2 was always just an add-on to a story that appealed way more to youngsters than adults in the first place, and I don't think they were apologetic about the fact that it was a giant commercial for merchandise sales throughout the remainder of 2011. With Brave on the way (and looking absolutely wonderful so far), it looks like they've only fallen off the track for a moment.

As for DreamWorks, perhaps the diminishing returns should be troubling, but in the end all of their films are raking in plenty of dough. It does have to be a touch troubling that they're looking at yet another Madagascar next year - a franchise that has never been associated with high quality in the first place - and the little buzzed about Rise of the Guardians, a title that is disturbingly reminiscent of The Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, even though the films have nothing to do with one another. Still, it's all about international dollars for DreamWorks, and I don't see that revenue falling off any time soon.

David Mumpower: I believe every statement made in this thread is reasonable yet I disagree with the overall group decision here that this isn't an alarming trend. Both studios have had 2011 trial runs for their sequels and the results have been sub-par. Yes, Shrek had a tremendous level of success with Shrek 2 and Shrek the Third but the wheels have come off since then. With so many animated franchises in various stages of sequel development, the turn of events in 2011 must be creating a high level of paranoia. I do think that Bruce has touched upon the crux of the matter in that while I loved Kung Fu Panda and Cars, I wasn't jonezing for a second title for either property. If I am not, I know that the majority of people are not because I like Cars a *lot* more than Finding Nemo. And Kung Fu Panda was in my top five for that year. Is the same true of a sequel to Monsters, Inc. or The Incredibles? I believe not.

Continued:       1       2       3