# Finding Dory [2016]



## masamune1 (Apr 3, 2013)

Also known as, still not _Incredibles 2._





> Finding Dory, the sequel to Finding Nemo, will take place a year after the events of the first film, it has been revealed.
> 
> According to Digital Spy, the follow-up will focus on forgetful fish Dory, voiced by the sequel Ellen DeGeneres, with the characters Marlin and Nemo returning.
> 
> ...



And out this year, a _spin-off_ of the _Cars_ movies called _Planes_. _Also_ not _Incredibles 2._





> August 9. Mark it in your iCal right now.
> 
> That's the release date for Disney's newest animated film, one based on the winning formula of "Cars," but featuring AIRPLANES. And, just as you'd expect, the title of the film is to be "Planes." The story follows the struggles of Dusty, a single-engine plane from a pastoral background who dreams of hitting the big time in air races.
> 
> ...



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bssstn218EA[/YOUTUBE]

*EDIT-* By the way, need to correct something- _Planes_ is a spin-off of _Cars,_ but it turns out it is not a Pixar production, just plane old Disney. My bad.


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

I believe the clouds have been brewing for Pixar's Dark Ages. Hopefully, like Disney, it will survive them.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

You cant stop this sinking ship Stunna. Someone get a shot gun time to put Pixar out their misery.


----------



## Ennoea (Apr 3, 2013)

Plenty of chumps will go watch these though. Shame, Pixar is really going down the drain.


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

Hey, Disney had hard times too. 

Pixar can survive this.


----------



## αshɘs (Apr 3, 2013)

bah, Pixar. They'll get their default Oscar and box office numbers regardless.


----------



## Ennoea (Apr 3, 2013)

> Hey, Disney had hard times too.
> 
> Pixar can survive this.



Disney is still bankrupt interms of originality and ideas but whoever is running the place is doing a good job of running it, aka profit.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

Pixar had what 10 years to get their shit together. Still havent found anything close to their creative originality they use to have.


----------



## Parallax (Apr 3, 2013)

why would you wanna be original when your product is basically an excuse to print money?


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

Ennoea said:


> Disney is still bankrupt interms of originality and ideas but whoever is running the place is doing a dood job of running it, aka profit.


I was referring to the Dark Ages. They had their Renaissance immediately after that, though.



Danger Doom said:


> Pixar had what 10 years to get their shit together. Still havent found anything close to their creative originality they use to have.


Pixar hasn't been in a rut for ten years. 

Before 2003 they just had Monsters Inc., the first two Toy Stories, and Bug's Life.


----------



## Ennoea (Apr 3, 2013)

Because eventually people won't pay money to watch your product. However Disney curtailed it by buying other properties and selling people more mediocre crap, aka Marvel.

Compared to Ghibli, Pixar is in a good position though. Ghibli is in serious trouble if they don't stop with all the nepotism.


----------



## Parallax (Apr 3, 2013)

are you serious  look at Star Wars or Disney properties 

they'll still make money


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

Name one Disney property that is comparable to SW?

John Carter? .......Pirates 4?


Ready to run away Para?


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

**


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

When last Mickey has made disney billions in a single movie , Ese?

All that ass kissing is causing lack of air to your brain.


----------



## Parallax (Apr 3, 2013)

I didn't say movies

I said property

semantics are important


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

Even in property, he is just nothing more than a spokesman.  He just pushes park ticket sales and merc at best. Disney crew couldnt sell a Tv show or movie even they hired decent writers.


----------



## Parallax (Apr 3, 2013)

that has nothing to do with my point

at all


----------



## Ennoea (Apr 3, 2013)

Disney is really profitable there's no question about that. But if Pixar starts making mediocre crap then who's gonna want to watch their stuff over the offerings from Dreamworks for instance? Pixar has always been about originality and quality, but with these announcement it's not looking good on that front. But then kids aren't such a discerning audience.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

It has everything to do with your point Mickey isnt making the money that Disney needs/wants particularly what it needs to sustain its Studios .  

Only thing keeping Disney alive are those Teenage girls that they keep ruining lives of.


----------



## Parallax (Apr 3, 2013)

you've obviously never been to Disneyland if you think that


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

Wreck-It Ralph's target demographic wasn't teenage girls.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Apr 3, 2013)

Hey Para: Fun Fact- anything made in Disney Land mostly goes to maintaining it. If you think that doesnt have a high cost you most be out of your mind.

Disney studios is another thing entirely. 

Wreck it Raph is the new Cars they made it so they can milk the shit out of it in sequels and merc.


----------



## Ice Cream (Apr 3, 2013)

masamune1 said:


> Also known as, still not _Incredibles 2._




The sequel to Finding Nemo is Finding Dory?...

Seriously?? 



Stunna said:


> Hey, Disney had hard times too.
> 
> Pixar can survive this.




Disney/Pixar will do fine even if they make a craptastic Cars 3 (which I'm sure we will see eventually).



Danger Doom said:


> Wreck it Raph is the new Cars they made it so they can milk the shit out of it in sequels and merc.




I'm not seeing Wreck It Ralph having anywhere near the potential for toys/products as Cars.


----------



## masamune1 (Apr 3, 2013)

By the way, need to correct something- _Planes_ is a spin-off of _Cars,_ but it turns out it is not a Pixar production, just plane old Disney. My bad.

Oh, and Disney Animated Classics line for the _Star Wars_ thing.

At least, when they are good.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Apr 3, 2013)

incredibles sucked, the truth u don't want to hear

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Wan (Apr 3, 2013)

I actually know the reason why they won't do Incredibles 2.  Ever heard of the web series on video games "Extra Credits"?  The editor and speaker for that show, Daniel Floyd, also works as an animator for Pixar.  I saw him speak at a video game convention a few months back (MAGFest, in Washington DC), and during a Q&A someone asked him why Pixar has made no sign of doing Incredibles 2.  His response was that Pixar doesn't want to do it without Brad Bird, the original movie's director (and also director of such movies as The Iron Giant and Ratatouille).  The problem is that with "Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol", Bird has moved on from animation to live action and doesn't want to go back.  

So Pixar doesn't want to do Incredibles 2 without Brad Bird, and Brad Bird doesn't want to do any more animated features.


----------



## Rukia (Apr 3, 2013)

Next announcement will be a Wall-E continuation.


----------



## Palpatine (Apr 3, 2013)

Honestly, Finding Dory has me sort of interested.

Planes...not so much.


----------



## Stunna (Apr 3, 2013)

Brad Bird doesn't want to do any more animation?


----------



## TetraVaal (Apr 4, 2013)

This and 'Elysium' open the same weekend.

I hope I run over some kids as I pull into the theatre parking lot.


----------



## Stunna (Dec 9, 2014)

*New Details about Finding Dory Setting*



> Last year, we reported that Pixar?s Finding Dory would be about the forgetful fish (Ellen DeGeneres) trying to find her parents with the help of Marlin (Albert Brooks) and Nemo.  We also learned that her story would take the trio from the Great Barrier Reef to along the California coastline.  Granted, the film is still far off and a lot can change when it comes to an animated movie, but it?s not a premise, especially if you have Diane Keaton and Eugene Levy voicing Dory?s parents.  There was also word that the movie would take place at an aquatic park, and that the ending was tweaked in response to the outcry from the heart-wrenching documentary Blackfish, which is about the abuse of orcas at Sea World.
> 
> Now a recent interview with Pixar President Jim Morris has provided new details regarding one of the film?s major settings and how it affects the plot.  Hit the jump for more.  Finding Dory opens June 17, 2016.
> 
> ...


----------



## scriptblossom (Dec 16, 2014)

I thought they were going to release in 2015 the last time I heard. Now it's 2016? :/ Dory must be really lost.


----------



## Stunna (Aug 14, 2015)

new pic


----------



## Atlas (Aug 15, 2015)

Ed O'Neill is playing the octopus.


----------



## Stunna (Nov 10, 2015)

[YOUTUBE]3JNLwlcPBPI[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Stunna (Mar 3, 2016)

[YOUTUBE]oddWuCHBmzA[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Mider T (Mar 4, 2016)

Took 13 years for this?  Guess this means Incredibles 2 will come out next year.


----------



## Bender (Mar 4, 2016)

Fish porn ahoy!


----------



## Wan (Mar 4, 2016)

Loved Finding Nemo, loved Dory.  But I have no interest in even pressing play on the trailer, the whole concept of a sequel focused on Dory seems inherently unnecessary to me.


----------



## BlazingInferno (Jun 17, 2016)

Funny how this thread was forgotten


----------



## A. Waltz (Jun 19, 2016)

man this was fucking great. honestly the best movie ive seen in theaters in recent years.


i thought it was going to be like a finding nemo sequel but believe me this is its own thing and it's so much better. wow. 

though tbf i rarely looked at any finding dory trailers. but seriously this was a great movie. give it a chance, and you'll be absolutely blown away, more than you could have imagined.


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 21, 2016)

MF NaruSimpson said:


> incredibles sucked, the truth u don't want to hear


p.S.
I didnt liked it either.

lol
But I am looking forward to see this one.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Jul 11, 2016)

This movie was so awesome.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Jul 17, 2016)

This movie was fucking amazing. Pixar has done it again.

Also lol at reading the first page of this thread and seeing all the shitposting. Then looking back and seeing Inside Out and Finding Dory.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Stunna (Jul 17, 2016)

Movie was alright. It was cute, but it wasn't good enough to justify why _Nemo _needed a sequel.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Jul 17, 2016)

Stunna said:


> Movie was alright. It was cute, but it wasn't good enough to justify why _Nemo _needed a sequel.



Films don't have to _need_ sequels. They make sequels because they are fun to watch. This movie was fun as hell.

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Stunna (Jul 17, 2016)

Dragon D. Luffy said:


> Films don't have to _need_ sequels. They make sequels because they are fun to watch. This movie was fun as hell.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Jul 17, 2016)

I think Pixar sequels justify themselves in how, instead of trying to continue a story that is already finished, they elaborate on some concept that the previous film didn't, and make the whole universe more realistic. I mean, every fantasy movie has those moments (TV Trops calls it Fridge Logic) where we realize certain real life details had to be ignored to make that story work. Pixar decides to stop ignoring them and use them to make another story.

All four Pixar sequels have an example of that: Toy Story 2 reminds us that those toys will be abandoned when their children grow up, and shows the truma caused by that. Toy Story 3 elaborates it further by having it happen to the original protagonists and forcing them to deal with it. Monsters University expands on the fact one of the protagonists had a boring job, by showing how he once tried to get his dream job, only to find out life is harsh so he had to work hard to achieve something barely close to what he wanted. Finally, Finding Dory expands on the comic relief character of the first film by asking the question: "what would happen if Dory's mental disability was actually a serious problem like it would be in real life?" and tells a story with it.

We could have other stuff like Wall-E's humans trying to cope with the fact they are all fat, or the Incredibles dealing with the fact half of them are basically child soldiers, or someone in the Ratatouille universe trying to shut down the restaurant because it's full of rats.


----------



## Stunna (Jul 17, 2016)

You forgot _Cars 2.
_
And Pixar producing sequels is a waste of time and energy that could be spent on original projects. Personally, I don't care about what happens after the ending of 90% of their movies, regardless of how much I enjoyed them.

The only Pixar sequel I've ever wanted to see was _Incredibles 2._


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Jul 17, 2016)

Stunna said:


> You forgot _Cars 2._



What are you talking about? They only made one Cars movie afaik.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------

