Anybody remember Circle-7?

I knew about this. I was always curious as to how their films would’ve turned out. The Monsters Inc one sounded like it might’ve been good. But it’s great that Pixar ended up making Toy Story 3 (instead of Circle-7) because that turned out to be a brilliant film.

I’m glad it didn’t go though too, MI2 sounded alright though.

Also found this.
blog.moviefone.com/2011/03/09/mo … r-concept/

Yeah, I’m glad that Circle-7 never went through. Their TS3 was a rehash of TS2 which I wouldn’t want to see. Their version of MI2 had me very interested.

Wow, that’s interesting seein their concept art.

Wonder what their Toy Story 3 was about.

It was about Buzz Lightyear being recalled to Taiwan because of a malfunction and they toys go to Taiwan to save him. It would of basically been a rehash of TS2.

Oh Yeah, I remember that.

It’s funny because when I first read the plot for the real Toy Story 3, I had a very different image of how it was going to be, than how it actually was in the end. What I do wonder (for Circle-7’s Toy Story 3) is what Buzz’s malfunction would’ve been (he seemed fine in the first two).

I always wondered that to. Maybe some of the newer Buzz Lightyear toys wern’t working properly which made them all get recalled.

Could be.

There was actually someone on imdb who felt that it would have been better if Circle 7 had stayed active, and done all those sequels they were planning. I guess their assumption was that if such a thing had come to pass, Cars 2 would never come into being (why is that the lynchpin in so many people’s thinking?).

I was glad that C7 was disbanded/shut down. John Lasseter and his friends felt these characters deserved respect and decent films…while Disney’s management just saw them as a cow to milk dry.

The Steve Jobs bio has a chapter telling of the negotiations (along with the Bug’s Life/Antz debacle) that Jobs had with Disney. At one point, Michael Eisner (who was no longer CEO), wanted to attend a board meeting and tell them they were making a big mistake to be making a billion-dollar purchase like that.

One funny part came when he called Bob Iger, and said that Disney would be fine without Pixar, and that Iger could fix Disney Animation. “Michael,” replied Iger, “If you couldn’t fix Disney Animation, what makes you think I can?”

The board meeting that Eisner attended, he claimed that due to the contract for 5 films, Disney already ‘owned’ 85% of Pixar (referring to the characters from Toy Story through Nemo, and the ability to exploit them and make numerous sequels). He felt that paying for the remaining ‘15%’ as he called it, was a bad move. His feeling was that in order for the deal they were planning to be profitable, each of the upcoming films would need to each make over a billion dollars to be profitable.

I recommend the jobs bio, btw. While he’s a stubborn, almost petulant ‘genius,’ Pixar was one of the few areas where he seemed more like a lamb than a lion.

Here’s an interview with interesting details about Circle 7 and the Pixar-sequel features that were in work there:

animatedviews.com/2012/bob-hilge … animation/

So Glad that circle 7 was shut down!

Ooh, interesting.I hadn’t seen some of that concept art before. Also they talk about a cars ‘slate’… :open_mouth: :confused:

I found this an interesting article, thanks for posting it.

Wow, great article! I only read some of it but I’ve never seen a lot of those images before, nor did I know the Monsters Inc. sequel they proposed had a name or a plot. Interesting. Notice how that rendering of Woody and Bullseye doesn’t look anywhere near as good as what Pixar could’ve made. :wink:

I think the rendering is actually concept art, so it wouldn’t have to be feature-quality.

The article supported the idea that any animation outfit employs talented folks; the difference comes down to how the leadership uses those talents. Personally, the MI2 concept as described seems more interesting than the official MU concept. Also, having recently seen Cars 2, it’s hard to feel that Pixar’s artists did a much better job than Circle 7 artists would have done on Pixar sequels…but we’ll never know for sure. Bottom line, it’s too bad that talented folks at Circle 7 suffered for business reasons.

I only recently learned of the Circle-7 story when I read The Toy Story Films: An Animated Journey. I remember when I first heard the plot for TS3, and it was the C7 one… I only realized a few years later that they had mentioned this company in that brief summary. Now, I am glad that Disney and Pixar stuck together. The sequels they came up with sounded decent, but they weren’t… well, Pixar-feeling! Pixar films always have a feel and look to them, and it would’ve stunk if someone else attempted to do that without Pixar. I’m not saying I’m glad they shut down, because they probably had some good original ideas somewhere. What I’m glad for is that Disney let Pixar handle the further adventures of their characters from now on. Say what you want about the Toy Story sequels, or Cars 2, or Monsters University, or Finding Dory, but I love the films already made and have high hopes for the upcoming ones, and I don’t think that C7 could ever achieve the Pixar Effect the way Pixar does. The Circle-7 stories were merely fanfiction!

I agree with you, ObsessedWithPixar. :slight_smile: I’m glad that in a way, at least Circle 7 wasn’t shut down completely in the sense that the workers were transferred to other Disney departments (or am I thinking of Disney Toon Studios? Sorry, I might be wrong on this one :blush: ), but still. Yeah, the stories were fan-fic-like, I think. What’s weird is how a few minor parts of Toy Story 3, from what I know, are vaguely similar to those of the final film. Plus, I would be disappointed to have to buy them just on DVD knowing they were not intended to be seen on the big screen. And yes, I am also a huge fan of Toy Story 2, Toy Story 3, and Cars 2, especially the “2” movies, and I believe that I will enjoy Monsters University and Finding Dory as well. There may be other Pixar sequels coming on the way according to something Pixar head Ed Catmull said, but I’m not worrying. Am I the only one who doesn’t mind sequels? I might have liked some more than others, but I generally don’t find many theatrical sequels disappointing. I think that was a thing of the past, if even that. I think a lot of the animation studios have figured out what it takes a make a decent, if not great sequel.

^Honestly I’m not all-too sure what happened to C7, it would’ve been cool if they found another place at Disney to work! Anyway, yeah, I’m like you in the area of being a sequel lover. I can’t recall ever seeing a sequel that wasn’t as good or better than its prequel! And I’d totally forgotten the direct-to-video thing they had planned; glad they didn’t do that, especially considering that Pixar broke through that idea and got TS2 in theaters! Interestingly enough, the first time I’d heard of another Monsters movie was a mistaken release date for the Circle-7 Monsters Inc 2, just like when I first heard about TS3! Glad that mystery is solved…

Fascinating. I remember the original idea for Toy Story 3 but I didnt know about Circle 7. I agree the Monsters Inc sequel looked interesting.