Comments (42) Lee Unkrich, News, Pete Docter, Pixar

Untitled Pixar Project Scheduled for Late May 2014!

Box Office Mojo and The Hollywood Reporter confirm that another untitled Pixar project, set to be released on May 30, 2014, is currently in the works.

The Walt Disney Studios made the announcement today although no further details were offered. Pixar’s yet-to-be-revealed film would follow the animation studio’s upcoming original project which is currently scheduled for the fall of 2013.

Toy Story 4 rumors will likely become associated with the Lamp’s 2014 release, but as always, the studio could have anything up its sleeves. Who might be directing the recently announced film? Pete Docter probably has the 2013 slot filled, so our best guess would be another Lee Unkrich offering.


42 Responses to Untitled Pixar Project Scheduled for Late May 2014!

  1. Anonymous says:

    Most likely Cars 3.

  2. Anonymous says:

    EW made an interesting point. If it is Toy Story 4, it would be a 4 year gap from Toy Story 3. And how many years from Toy Story to Toy Story 2…4 years. And you know what else? They were all great. Toy Story 4 should not equal Cars 2 in quality.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I think it’s Toy Story 4. I expect Toy Story 4 to be released in 2014 and Cars 3 in 2015. Considering it’s Pixar, I don’t expect an original feature.

  4. Anonymous says:

    You never know what it could be! An original feature? A sequel? Another Prequel? Toy Story 4 would be awesome but what would it be about? Seeing Andy again? Reuniting with old toys? A trip back to Sunnyside? Any other ideas?

    Incredibles 2 is another possibility. The first Incredibles left on a good note to continue another movie. There already is a video game out of that!

    Maybe Pixar should do a new idea. Maybe dinosaurs or a Mystery or going into the future or past. There are many things that it could be. I want to hear your ideas too!

  5. Anonymous says:

    For the comment above; those are great ideas. Another idea is something to do with a really old Granny and Grandpa.

  6. Anonymous says:

    A granny and a grandpa? That’s cool! A cat too. This is fun brainstorming.

    For the detective idea; it could have an amazing detective die and his son has to solve a mystery but is bad at it

  7. Anonymous says:

    To the one who posted on Aug. 9 12:20PM:

    Your comment ruined everyone’s day. Pixar, in fact, only does a sequel when they find a good story. A pete Doctor original film is in development. I’m not saying everyone is going to like the projects announced, but your comment of associating Pixar with sequels is untrue. If you want a name to associate sequels with, try Disneytoon with Planes and Tinker Bell. Just because the last 2 pixar films were sequels doesn’t mean you can associate Pixar with sequels. They only did these sequels because they thought they had the perfect story. Maybe Cars 2 didn’t meet everyone’s vision (except for mine) but even if Pixar announces a sequel, don’t deride it just because it’s not an original film. Your comment is too strong.

  8. Anonymous says:

    I really didn’t mean to ruin your day. I wasn’t trying to hurt anyone— I’m really sorry. I’m a huge Pixar fan! I was just trying to brainstorm ideas. I love Cars 2 by the way. It’s my favorite movie (saw it three times). Once again, I’m sorry!

  9. Anonymous says:

    August 9- 9:08

    Amazing speech! I love Cars 2 – why are other people not liking it! No matter what kind of film Pixar is going to make, I’m going to like it!

  10. Anonymous says:

    To Anonymous who posted at 9:08 PM on 8/9:

    I know you didnt mean to ruin anyones day but the statement wasn’t about Cars 2, it was just the fact that you impliued Pixar was a sequel machine when in fact, Pixar makes plenty of original movies. They only make sequels with good stories, not all the time like Dreamworks or Blue Sky.

  11. Anonymous says:

    “Pixar, in fact, only does a sequel when they find a good story.”

    But they made cars 2. I guess that debunks that.

  12. Anonymous says:

    To Aug 9: 10:31

    Im not going to argue with your opinion but Pixar did make Cars 2 because in their head, they found a worthy story that succeeded Cars, not because it was an easy cashgrab. I also thought it was great.

  13. Anonymous says:

    To be fair Cars 2 didn’t come about because they had a story sitting around, it was because they really liked the characters. If memory serves correctly the germ for the idea came about when John was doing press tours for Cars and pictured how Mater would react in certain situations, not because they had a good story.

    And you can’t deny that Pixar is producing more sequels than usual. In the past Pixar only had one sequel in their lineup: Toy Story 2. But if you look at the slate from 2010 on suddenly we have three sequels in four years; Toy Story 3, Cars 2, and Monsters 2, with the possibility that their 2014 movie may also be Toy Story 4. Walt Disney CEO Bob Iger himself said that he is interested in franchise creation:

    I have nothing against sequels, I enjoyed Toy Story 2 and 3 and was optimistic about Cars 2. But let’s face the facts, Lee Unkrich talks a lot about when he was in charge of Toy Story 3 he tried racking his brain for great third films and could only come up with a handful. I can only imagine the list gets even shorter for 4th ones (If there is in fact a 4th Toy Story in development). Toy Story 3 ended on a high note, to create another film would only tarnish that ending. I can understand where Pixar is coming from, they have created a lot of memorable characters over the years and it would be fun to revisit some of them. But let them live on through other media like Toy Story Shorts. What’s nice about Pixar is that they are one of the few studios that really take chances. Nowadays it seems like everything is a sequel or based off some pre existing property.

    Pixar’s next few films are ones that have been greenlit post Disney buyout. Their production may not be entirely for artistic reasons.

  14. Anonymous says:

    No—they made cars 2 to sell toys. Period. That’s why they’ll make cars 3.

    The film will eventually climb out of the red (film plus prints and advertising times 3 means it has to cross $650 million as a film to be profitable).

    It’s a mess of a film, and I’m in the VAST majority who believe so. It’s an expensive toy commercial. Disney will make sequels to every Pixar cartoon—great story or not.

  15. Anonymous says:

    .To both Anonymous Aug. 9, 10:27 PM and Aug 10, 1:27 AM

    Cars 2 wasnt just made due to the international observations. It was also made to help John Lasseter tell his vision for a spy movie. He thought Cars would be a great fit because spy movies use cars to an extensive extent. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but the fact is that Pixar decided to move forward with Cars 2 because in their mind, they found the perfect plot, not because of the revenue. As for sequels, Toy Story 4 would indeed ruin the fabric but I don’t think Pixar would be stupid enough to make one. The only Pixar filmm that needs a sequel right now is The Incredibles.

  16. Anonymous says:

    That us only your opinion—and not a fact. It was a horrible film. And it was not done for anything but to sell toys. And there’s nothing wrong with that. He’ll, Walt Disney made THREE sequels to his Three Little Pigs short to sell toys!

  17. Anonymous says:

    To Anonymous Aug 10, 9:09 AM

    My opinion of the film is my opinion and your opinion of the film is your opinion but, while studios often have secrets, Pixar’s no. 1 statement they put out is that they only make sequels if they have good stories. As for Walt Disney, he regretted his decision afterward even using the line that you can’t top pigs with pigs. There is nothing wrong with sequels but, for better or worse, they only move forwqard with sequels if they have good stories. You might not feel that way with Cars 2 but, trust them, they had a good story in their heads. Pixar probably had some good concepts for sequels to its films. THe reason why it didn’t happen quickly was because sequel rights were owned by Disney at the time. When Pixar was brought out, John Lasseter was named head of the animated division, That gave him power over sequels.

  18. Anonymous says:

    In Thier heads Not on the screen. And to sell toys.

  19. Anonymous says:

    To Anonymous Aug 10, 9:47

    Pixar making a good story in their heads is proof enough that they aren’t just getting in on the cashgrab. True, Cars 2 did move a lot of toys but, when you look at Toy Story 3, yes, that too did move a lot of toys but it was also acclaimed. Im not saying that Cars 2 will have the same feeling for you but, as head of the animation division, they waited for Cars 2 until they found inspiration.

  20. Anonymous says:

    John Lasseter waited for inspiration, I mean.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Yes, I agree. It’s quite clear they did the cars 2 movie to sell toys. There’s no excuse for the weak story, characters, and cheap look. Repeat viewings have been nil, and it’s officially Pixar’s first “kid’s” cartoon. Like that flop range, it has little to offer anyone over the age of 7

  22. Anonymous says:

    JUst because it’s Pixars First kids film doesn’t mean that a kid film is a bomb. Take Winnie the pooh for example. That’s a kids film but it still got a lot of critical acclaim. I’m just saying that opinions are opinions but the fact is that Cars 2 was part inspiration and part desire, not 100% cash grab.

  23. Anonymous says:

    That’s not a “fact.” It’s an opinion. Cars made nearly $10 Billion in toy sales. Hence Cars 2. That’s not an opinion. That’s a fact.

  24. Anonymous says:

    You can’t associate the words kids film as a bomb. What about the ones aimed at adults that bombed like Disaster Movie and LOve Guru or Gigli? It’s true that Cars did make nearly 10 billion dollars. That doesn’t mean it’s the only reason why Cars 2 was made.

  25. Anonymous says:

    in merchandise for Cars.

  26. Anonymous says:

    $10 Billion Dollars? If it made that much, than why is Avatar the only film to reach multi-billion dollars?

    Aside from that, I have my own ideas for films.

    Toy Story 4, set a few years later and Bonnie takes her toys on a vacation with her. The toys reunite with Andy, Prospector and Lotso.

    A Bug’s Life 2, a flood causes the ants to leave their anthill and search for a new home.

    Welcome to (y)our Mansion, during a mansion party, the guests begin to disappear.

    Hope you like them

  27. Anonymous says:

    Those are great ideas! I was thinking the same thing about Bug’s Life 2. I also have an idea for a mystery project. A really great and smart detective dies and his son has to finish a hard case. The problem is he is not good at solving mysteries. Those were great ideas, I’m serious — Really Good! I like the Toy Story 4 one!

  28. Anonymous says:

    I have an idea about a Cop and Robber too! A really stupid cop gets help from a girl cop as they try to catch a funny robber who is on the move stealing things. The robber gets into situations like hiding at his Grandpa Joe’s house, disguise shop people attack him for shop lifting at their store, and getting into many chases by Cop.

  29. Anonymous says:

    I made a mistake. I meant ten billion in merchandising.. I meant that even though Cars made 10 billion in merchandising, it’s not the sole reason why Cars 2 was made. My only consideration I would give an idea for a Pixar sequel is The Incredibles 2 with the family growing up.

  30. Anonymous says:

    It’s called “SHOW BUSINESS.” Key word being “Business.” Even Toy Story was made to make money and sell toys. Disney wants sequels, and Cars sold so many toys, they wanted another one. The sequel is a mess, but it’s sold lots of toys. Disney wanted it, and they pushed it through. There is nothing wrong with that. Even Walt Disney did this. A lot.

    BUT—it’s a horrible cartoon. It’s sold a ton of toys and the film was made to sell them. It’s never the “sole” reason. But it was the impetus, and the primary one.

  31. Anonymous says:

    The decision for sequels all rest in the hand of Pixar. Disney may have greenlighted Cars 2 in 2 seconds but they waited until John Lasseter explained his vision for his sequel which is a combination of international travels and spy story. Story was the primary reason why this one got made with profits a secondthought. They needed to make, in their opinion, the best sequel to Cars 2. Like I said, opinions are opinions when it comes to judging Cars 2, but the fact is that Cars 2 was greenlighted for story first. If profits from Cars were the primary reason why this one got made, The Incredibles 2, Finding Nemo 2, A bug’s life 2, and Up 2 would have all been greenlighted and be in production now for similar reasons. Pixar maintained its stance to do sequels only when they decidied on a good story to them. Opinions are never wrong to anyone (there is no right or wrong answer) but in fact lean towards one way only.

  32. Anonymous says:

    By the way, you may be confusing the time period when Michael Eisner wanted sequels to Disney’s classics. The one time Disney did sequels to The Three Pigs, he regretted it. He was opposed to sequels with the exception of those with cartoon characters and his planned Fantasia series.

  33. Anonymous says:

    I’m the same guy who posted the “8.11 12:51“comment.

    The guy who posted after me, I’m glad you like my ideas! Your mystery movie sounds so awesome!

  34. Anonymous says:


  35. Anonymous says:

    cars 2 wasn’t “green lit” for “story first.”. That story wouldn’t have made the third cut at any studio. Disney wanted the money from the toys, and wanted a sequel. The reason it got made.

  36. Anonymous says:

    Disney may have wanted a sequel, but did not force Pixar to make one. They waited until Pixar greenlighted it themselves when they found a good story. If disney forced Pixar to make a sequel to Cars, we would have been seeing sequels o Finding Nemo, Wall E, Up and The Incredibles by now. Pixar only makes sequels when they found, in their heads, a great sequel. I don’t mean that Pixar has to get positive opinions from every single human in the world.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Great point! That’s what I have been trying to say

  38. Anonymous says:

    Problem is, they didn’t find a good story. And don’t fool yourself, Disney controls Pixar. Anyone who thinks differently is a fool. Disney runs Pixar.

  39. Anonymous says:

    John Lasseter controls the animation output. He determines what is made in Pixar and Disney animation studios. The only thing Disney might do is reject the films proposed, not force them to make the films they want. Pixar found a good story in their heads. I’m not saying everyone in the world likes it but just because Pixar might have disappointed with one film(though I liked cars 2) doesn’t mean they should reject Pixar statements.

  40. Anonymous says:

    Cars 2 was made because Disney wanted the money, not because there was a “good idea.” There wasn’t, that’s obvious. If they believed in the “good idea” so much, why did they give it to a novice director with zero experience who dragged it into the gutter? That brad lewis guy nearly ruined the franchise!

  41. Anonymous says:

    Disney may have wanted the money but the decision for all animated output rmade at Disney rests in John Lasseter’s hands. In his mind, he found a good story for Cars 2 so he greenlighted it. By the way, John Lasseter was the main director of this film. They first choose to give it to Brad Lewis to follow the trend of animators turned directors like Pete Doctor and Andrew Stanton. John Lasseter then took over to improve the film. Think Toy Story 2. When I say “a good idea”, I mean it’s in Pixar’s head. Im not saying you have to like it. I am saying however that the decision to make this film had to do with a lot more than financial purposes. Like I said, opinions of Cars 2 can vary as much as they want (even though I liked Cars 2) but facts of how this was made lead to only one conclusion, and that it was made to get an idea of theirs out.

  42. Anonymous says:

    I have proof that Cars 2 wasn’t just made for money.

Join the Discussion!