Actually, now that it’s been mentioned, [spoil]using the “You are a toy!” speech in a negative way by having Lotso say part of it would have been pretty interesting, simply by completely reversing the meaning of it. He could have simply yelled “You are a toy! You’re a piece of plastic…” and then continued the dialog as it is already. I think that’s all it would have taken for people to catch the reference. I don’t think it’s necessary, though, which is probably why it’s not there, but it’s a curious concept.[/spoil]
I would have liked to see a quick scene [spoil]in the credits with Lotso being shown still on the truck grill and looking torn up and dirty. That way people who arn’t sure about Lotso’s fate can know that he’s definately getting his comeuppance. 
[/spoil]
I’d rather [spoil]if he’d been burned by the incinerator or if Sid had gotten him and torn him up.[/spoil] -Omar
Andy’s dad was never part of the story so there is no reason to include him now.
It’s not like if he was going to make an apparition.
They’re only saying he could be referenced in a line. That’s not something unusual.
I like that we never know about Andy’s dad. We can imagine and create him however we want.
Possibly the reason they didn’t include him at all, they didn’t want to finalize his character in anyway beyond just the viewer’s imagination, since we’ve all had ten years to imagine him, lol
The only thing that I wish was done with Spanish Buzz, would be him yelling out “Por que?!” 
There are a few parts that it could’ve been done, but most likely where [spoil]Jessie runs to Woody after he, Bullseye, and the aliens cross the sidewalk into the bushes.[/spoil]
Not being a part of the story is precisely Why he could have used a mention or reference of some sort. Its not like I’m asking them to introduce Andy’s cousin or some other random person its the guy’s father for crying out loud. Was he there for him growing up, was he killed, never in his life at all, did he give Andy Woody, these are questions I think a lot of fans have had that could have been answered very quickly without dwelling on it too long. not all but at least one.
This isnt really about why I would have liked to see necessarily, but its not something worth making a new topic for, so I’ll say it here: was anyone else [spoil]expecting the part wheres Andy talks on his cel to Woody to be a set up to a plot point later on? I mean, look how intently Woody listens to Andy’s voice on the phone. I thought maybe Woody had it set up to record his voice, so he could listen to it later to remember him by.[/spoil]
EDIT- Please use spoiler tags when revealing spoilers, thanks!
-lizardgirl
I was hoping for a more dramatic take on Buzzy, very much in the way the story handled Woddy in the second film (which is probably why #2 is my favorite).
I’ve always liked Woody over Buzz, but I just really wanted there to be something really speical for Buzz in this one - That wasn’t comedic, i.e. Spanish Buzz, which was great nonetheless!
Considering how hard Pixar’s story department works on all of their films, I can’t help but want to bite my tongue and not say anything against what I would have wanted to see or change in any of the stories. All those amazing story artists are probably the best writers in the history of film, and it’s not my place to judge them or say anything about how they should have written their stories.
As far as Sid goes, my siblings and I already figured out who he was because of his shirt, so I don’t think the film had to tell who it was more than they already did.
But to tell you the truth, there is one thing…JUST ONE…that I would have liked to change about TS3…and it’s about Lotso and how mean he was to Big Baby. His character as the villian of the story was VERY well done, and the level of his “evilness” was just the right amount for a Pixar film - mean enough but not too violent.
[spoil] But this didn’t seem to apply in his treatment to Big Baby. The incident where he tears off Big Baby’s locket and says “She don’t love you no more!” and then near the end of the film where Lotso pushes Big Baby, yells, and makes Big Baby cry…[/spoil].it just broke my heart and really stuck to my mind about how sad and upsetting that was.
Even though I’m 20 years old, I’m still very tenderhearted…so I guess that’s just why I have an issue with that part.
But other than that, I love “Toy Story 3” and everything that’s in it…the [spoil]relationship between Buzz and Jessie, Woody’s unfailing loyalty to Andy, the redemption of all the Day Care toys, Andy’s story of him growing up, the true message of friendship that oh-so-present in all of the “Toy Story” films…[/spoil]and so much more! There’s so much heart and soul to these films…more than I could ever say!
John Lasster, Andrew Stanton, and Lee Unkrich…they all deserve THREE rounds of applause for what they’ve done for these three films! Pixar has done it again!
EDIT- Please use spoiler tags when revealing spoilers, thanks!
-lizardgirl
I was really satisfied with Toy Story 3, but if there was one thing I would like to see in there, it would have been a LEGO man character/s
There were LEGO characters, but just in the background. They’re specifically in the shots with the elephant sneezing and the one with Twitch and Mrs. Potato Head. I do wish they could’ve had a bigger role in some way, though.
Yeah! That was something I was wishing to see before the movie. I’m a big Lego fan.
Lee Unkrich talks in the Art of TS3 book about Lotso and Big Baby: [spoil]Basically, they found that, at early screenings, a lot of audience members wanted to see Lotso redeem himself and turn good, and the filmmakers didn’t want that. They decided Lotso’s flashback was making him too sympathetic, so they added the business of him lying to and being mean to Big Baby so the audience wouldn’t feel quite so sorry for Lotso.[/spoil]
To clarify my issue with Sid, it’s not so much that I wish they’d made it clearer that guy was Sid, I just wish they’d made it more clear that the other garbage man who [spoil]ended up with Lotso[/spoil] WASN’T Sid. That’s a big pet peeve of mine when people think that guy was Sid. 
How did people get the two confused?!
[spoil]Sid had headphones on and dancing around all the time and had the orange safety jacket. And jeans.
The other dude wore a complete orange outfit and was old and stuff. TBH, I thought he was a convict doing community service instead of a truck driver (?)[/spoil]
It will sound somewhat evil and morbid, but I wouldn’t have minded the “death” of a toy being explored. In particular, I wouldn’t have minded if Bo Peep had been “broken” instead of sold/given-away.
All of Andy’s other toys were “explained away” as having been sold or given away. And while Lotso mentioned that toys in the caterpillar room didn’t live/last long, we didn’t “see” any toys get permanently broken or “die”.
It seemed that death was a pretty big “theme” of TS3, but it was hard to truly appreciate that a “toy” could die without really ever seeing it happen or even hearing about it second-hand (as could have happened with Bo Peep).
I also wish that Buzz and Jessie’s relationship had been more developed. They’d known each other for 10+ years, but they still hadn’t admitted their feelings? That seemed a little odd to me. Sure it was great to witness the “start” of their relationship on-screen, but I also wouldn’t have minded seeing an exploration of a long-term relationship, including seeing Jessie heart-broken when Buzz was returned to his default mode.
Finally, I wouldn’t have minded a clearer explanation of what made a “toy”. In TS2 one of the toys that Andy’s mum gathers for the garage sale was a wooden car, but none of the toys seemed concerned about it being sold, indicating that it wasn’t a true “toy”, yet other “cars/vehicles” had their own personality in the films (like RC). Does a “toy” need a face to be “alive”? The legs and fishing rod “toy” from TS1 was “alive” even though it didn’t have a face, although I guess the legs would have had a “face” (and upper torso at one point in time before Sid got a hold of the doll).
[spoil]What about the toy train in the Caterpillar room? That was broken and got thrown in the dumster, with no indication that it ever got out. Chances are that it was incinerated/shredded.[/spoil]
This makes sense, and I honestly found no fault with how Lotso met his “fate”, if you will, at the film’s end. This is just what I mean about hesitating before criticizing a Pixar film, because the story artists, the director, and everyone else involved with story department work soooooo hard to get the story of the film just right for their audiences……both for older and more mature minds to appreciate, AND for kids to understand what is going on with the characters and be entertained in the process, too. What a job that is! It’s a honor to do something like that, I believe…but I have no doubt that’s a very challenging job, too.
See, the sad thing is this: how we as mature adults see something in films like these that children do not see AT ALL. I think the problem is that we read “too much” into these films and start criticizing what we think the message of the film is promoting, or what the characters are doing, etc….but this is NOT what the story writers intended at all. As kind as I can say this, DreamWorks and other film companies are the ones who purposely put adult references, humor, too-mature content, and deeper themes that are either supposed to poke fun at something or to influence the viewers who watch them in an extremely negative and almost immoral way. What kind of role models are we to our children if we let them watch films like these? Are we telling them that this is okay? That this is how we should act or what is normal?
Like an excellent critic once remarked in a review of “The Incredibles”, Pixar has risen above Hollywood’s norm and believes in a story with a heart, a soul, and a message that children AND adults can carry with them and even affect them positively with a greater appreciation for life.
I don’t think “Toy Story 3” heavily carries the message of death…it simply explains and tells the “fate” of toys in a real world. What happens to toys that get broken and can’t be fixed? They’re thrown away. What happens when you realize that you have too much stuff in the house and you need to get rid of it? You either sell it or give it away to those who could use it.
The story artists at Pixar aren’t gloom-spreaders who want to convey the message of doom’s-day…they are telling a story about reality, but in the viewpoint of an actual toy. It applies the same way to “A Bug’s Life”, “Finding Nemo” and “Ratatouille”:
In the world of Mother Nature, seemingly stronger and more dominant insects do overrule a seemingly weaker species, but a story is told through an ant’s perspective and how he dreams of something better for his kind.
The fishing industry is real, and the fact that we have fish as pets and in our aquariums is a reality. Pixar is simply telling the story through a fish’s view.
And the fact that rats carry diseases and live in sewers is true, but a story can be told through one of their kind who wants to change that and rise above this norm.
Each Pixar film is different – they all carry a unique message about life, friendship, loyalty, and love. They all have different and interesting characters, completely set apart from one another but bonded in the warm ties of friendship. They all take place in a creative and amazing setting…taking us audiences into a world we never could have imagined, but told through the viewpoint of those creatures and characters who really do live in them.
But most importantly, Pixar is about story-telling…their job and their belief is to tell a story that will inspire, entertain, excite, touch, and captivate those who hear and watch them. The studio seems to have done just that through “Toy Story 3”!
I saw potential for a great Easter Egg during the [spoil]Mr. Tortilla Head[/spoil] scene. The bird should have been the same color as the one from A Bug’s Life!