Talk:Toy Story 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Toy Story 3 article.
Article policies
Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Future
This article has been rated as Future-Class on the quality scale.
???
This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Animation
Animation Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject American Animation. (with unknown importance)
This article is supported by the Pixar work group. (rated as top importance)
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Distribution

Is Toy Story 3 going to be a theatrical film or direct-to-video like a lot of sequels?

Most likely it'll be released in cinemas first since it is a popular title. -- Thorpe talk 12:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Irreverent testament

Can someone find a way to rephrase this?

...many feel Toy Story 3, and an inevitable replacement for the voice of Slinky Dog, to be an irreverent testament to the former comedian...

If I knew what the hell an "irreverent testament" was, I'd reword it myself. --P3d0 16:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Hanks

Is Tom Hanks going to be the voice of Woody in this film? Scorpionman 03:44, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know...Can someone who knows please let us know? 4.158.210.233 01:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Could you also answer the same question for Tim Allen with Buzz!? — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 21:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Most likely they will. It's the case with John Ratzenberger, who will be sure to voice Hamm now that Pixar are involved. I think that Hanks and Allen will return for Woody and Buzz, and I believe that Jim Cummings will voice Slinky Dog (speculation). Jienum

Jim Cummings as slinky dog? are you crazy? No Offense, but I think sSlink won't be in this flick due to Jim Varney's death —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.187.123 (talk) 19:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Under new management

Now that Disney and Pixar are one, will Disney or Pixar or both be working on this movie?

This film has been cancelled, but the creators of Toy Story and Toy Story 2 could decide to make another sequel in future. I personally think this is good news, since this movie would have potentially killed the series. Mushroom 14:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I wish Toy Story 3 comes soon!

[edit] Image removal

I removed the image as the idea of a buzz lightyear recall has been officially scrapped by both Disney and Pixar making the outdated picture irrelevent. Dark jedi requiem 19:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Cool image though, and I'm glad it's been moved down to the original plot section. That stuff's historical.

[edit] Release?

Isn't 2008 the year Disney was planning on releasing Toy Story 3?? The fact that Production has been transfered Pixar means this date can no longer be official, unless Pixar has mentioned a date, which I doubt -- Remember Lasster saying, "We're not talking about Toy Story 3 yet. Sorry!"

That is true. Now it says TBA instead of speculation.Dark jedi requiem 16:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patrick Warburton

Is there anything resembling a source for the Patrick Warburton blurb, or should it just be deleted now? --JT706 16:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] starring

If you add actors, cite sources. Dark jedi requiem 07:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I wonder

I wonder is the anymore to this film. That looks like a great film. When it comes out. --Philip1992 16:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Philip1992

[edit] W A L E

What kind of film is W A L E that this article mentions?? Georgia guy 13:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

where? i dont see it --Coolgokid 04:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Previous Plot

The improved storyline will feature a trip to a stripclub, to rescue Buzz from a crazy hooker.

Err...what?

Aah, if only all vandalism was BJAODN worthy. --Sonic Mew 22:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To the Theatres!

For a movie starring both Tom Hanks and Tim Allen, I highly doubt this will be a straight-to-video release. 24.23.51.27 19:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

You never know... Pixar and Disney had a serious conflict over releasing Toy Story 2 to theaters, didn't they? We're not really sure of anything at the moment. Kochdude388 20:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] August 6, 2008?

Where is this confirmed? GKMorse 03:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

it's not jj 03:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] are we sure?

the Variety article says "In addition to confirming for the first time that a third "Toy Story" is in the works, most likely for 2009 release, Lasseter said Lee Unkrich will helm it." Is "most likely" the same as "definitely"? SpikeJones 12:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I interpret that as "We're currently running on a schedule with a release date in 2009, but it's not set in stone and we might change it". Remember, Cars was scheduled to be released in November 2005 for a long time. Until we hear information which contradicts it, 2009 should be alright. RMS Oceanic 21:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Something additional you could do is state both in the lead paragraph and the Infobox Film template is to mention "tentative". For example, "2009 (tenative)" in the template, and "Toy Story 3 has a tentative release date for 2009." That would illustrate the information we have accurately. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 21:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oh, great! Junk!

Someone has vandalised the article by naming a heading "U SUCK". I will delete this vandalism, but is there anything else we can do about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ANNAfoxlover (talk • contribs) 19:57, February 12, 2007

I've fixed the problem. If the vandalism becomes persistent, then page protection can be requested. I'll keep my eye on the article to see if there are any future cases of vandalism. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 23:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Searching for 74.38.12.109!

74.38.12.109, if you're here, may I ask you a question regarding this article? Thank you. Please sign your name with ~~~~. Thank you. 74.38.12.109, please respond. Thank you. ANNAfoxlover 00:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The user only made one edit, according to his contribution history, so he/she was probably a passing visitor. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 00:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
But he/she vandalised the article! ;-( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.210.200.212 (talk) 15:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
What'd heshe do? Post it, word for word. PS: Hi, I admit I did this crime. :rolleyes: How do we do smilies here?
He/she put the words "U SUCK" in big letters right in the middle of the article. A•N•N•A hi! 02:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Gah! Someone added six informal letters. HELP! WE'RE AFRAID OF IT!

[edit] Other plot?

I heard that at Disney World, they were saying there was a different plot: Andy's mom gets re-married and soon Andy has a step-sister. The toys have to put up with girl toys. 75.63.66.186 22:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, unless you can provide solid evidence, we can't mention anything about that on the page. Rusty5 01:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Plus, Andy already has Molly. jj 02:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
(Sarcasm:) So you mean, becuase of my little brother, it's impossible to get a step?
(No sarcasm) No, he means that Andy's toys already deal with girl toys since he has a little sister, so that plot is unnecessary and redundant. --ScreaminEagle 20:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler tag?

Does anyone else think there should be a spoiler tag before the plot section. I think it is highly likely that Pixar will indeed use the childcare centre plot and it's not good to give that away without a warning... --211.26.114.76 02:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Nah. A•N•N•Afoxlover hello! 20:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Pixar creates all films inhouse. jj 21:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
It would be nice if you would care to explain why you don't think a spoiler tag should be in place.
I'm not sure what that has to do with what I was saying. The child care centre plot came directly from John Lasseter/Pixar themselves. The idea was talked about during a DVD commentary- that's how we know about it. --58.179.224.128 08:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The commentary to which film? Be as verifiable as possible. WikiNew 09:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The DVD commentary on the Ultimate Toy Box DVD set. I'm guessing they mention it on the commentary for Toy Story, or Toy Story 2. --211.26.60.151 00:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Please give the section name and timestamp of the comment. Otherwise, we have to treat this as completely unverifable.SpikeJones 03:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Characters not appearing

It's more than obvious the Slinky Dog, Lenny theBinoculars, and Wheezy the Penguin won't appear on account that their respective voice actors Jim Varney and Joe Ranft passed away. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.244.187.122 (talk) 17:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Just because the voice actors died doesn't necessarily mean they'll be written out. Chances are, out of respect, Joe Ranft's roles will be cut (after all, they were pretty minor to begin with). However, I'd expect that they'd find a new voice for Slinky. Rusty5 17:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Do not use Wikipedia as a forum. Alientraveller 17:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

We're not trying to. I'm rather clarifying that, although it's uncertain whether the mentioned characters will be in the film, we shouldn't just erase the possibilities and mention in the article that they won't appear (which might have been the original poster's idea). I suggest we now close this section. Rusty5 00:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No. Mention the characters as they are officially announced. If and when we confirm from reliable outside parties that specific characters are not in the film due to various actors' deaths, then it may deserve a passing mention. WP:NOT a crystal ball. SpikeJones 03:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toy Story 3: Prospector's Revenge

Someone changed the title of the Toy Story 3 article to this. Is this confirmed somwhere because i doubt Toy Story 3 will have a second name. Martini833 23:38, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Final installment

Should it be meniton that this is the last Toy story filmSonicrules2 01:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Sonicrules2

Only if you have citable proof that it is. SpikeJones 02:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation?

"Being that the film is slated for release in 2010 it is more likely than not that the film may be modified for an older demographic than its previous installments. Being the generation that experienced the original two films will, by 2010, be at least 15-17 years older by then." I don't see how this could be a speculation, if Toy Story 3 does come out in 2010 there is no doubt that Toy Story's generations of child audiences will be significantly older. They will all technically be teenagers by then. Being that it is a sequel, a fraction of the demographic are people who experienced the first two. Teenagers are a very valid guess for Toy Story 3's target audience. Papa Mama 20:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC) Papa Mama

That is speculation because you think because the age of a child who saw a film then affects that all films they see in future have to grow up too. Pixar make family films. Clearly, you fail to understand WP:V. Alientraveller 20:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say it WASN'T going to be a family movie. Teenagers have entertainment away from the family for sure, but that doesn't mean it WILL be modified just for them. What i'm saying is teenagers, if after experiencing TS1 and TS2, will want to come back if there is a TS3. And it's a good chance that they will. Papa Mama 20:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and the point you making was it will be modified to suit an older demographic? Who's to say it will other than your opinion? Alientraveller 20:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say it will, I said there was a good chance that it might. What I did say with will in it was that teens could hold a good portion of the movie's audience but that doesn't mean that the film will be modified just for them. Papa Mama 21:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Might, will, all are your opinion and cannot be included. Alientraveller 21:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

What's the use of me arguing with you if everything you say is right. It's hard for me to understand what you say because your english is obviously not perfect. I've made my point several times already. Papa Mama 21:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Look, it's speculation to include such opinions of yours that aren't reflected by a major publisher nor the filmmakers. Just understand Wikipedia:Verifiability. Alientraveller 21:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The information is verifiable in itself! Just like how 2+2=4. You do not have to reference that two plus another two equals four. people can do that sort of stuff without anybody officially stating it is, in fact, four. Toy Story 3 is coming out 15 years later than Toy story 1 and 13 years later than Toy Story 2.

No, just get the rules. We're not discussing math, we're discussing artistic intent of another human being. Alientraveller 21:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

2+2=4, yes, but films don't always "age" like you are suggesting. What you are trying to introduce is pure personal opinion. You have no source to back up what you are saying. It's called original research, and it's basically forbidden on Wikipedia. If you have verifiable, reliable sources that say the film may change demographics, great. But without those sources you might as well say "This film could very well have no plot and could be just a bnuch of bright colors and loud noices, aimed at the toddler audience". Star Wars didn't change demographics, and that second trilogy didn't come out until 20 years later.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but after all, it IS an unreleased movie. We're not all too sure. Papa Mama 23:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Precisely, it's an unreleased movie and you are making assumptions about who the studio will try and market there film toward, when you have no reliable source (other than your brain, which isn't reliable per Wikipedia's standards) that says anything of the sort about the film's intended demographic.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Please consider this: Disney's Cinderella was released in the middle of the 20th century. Just recently we got Cinderella 3: A Twist In Time, decades after the original. It's a timeless tale, as many older Disney films are. That's why they can cough up sequels by the month and still reel in cold cash. Toy Story is a classic film, which still has high marketing in most stores. Now, notice that none of the new Cinderella films have complex stories a teen girl would love. They simply can't keep the same audience they had during the first film. I'm sure that 3 will have the same style as the first two of the series. 'Nuff said. Rusty5 00:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

That's sixteen years. I only will be fifteen, so, yeah, you're right. It's one year older! :-)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TS3 logo 4.JPG

Image:TS3 logo 4.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joe Ranft

The article notes that Joe Ranft met with the story team in February of 2006. Sadly, that would not have been possible as he died in 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.94.41 (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. Lasseter said the "same group" that first discussed Toy Story pitched this film: not exactly John. Alientraveller (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New plot?

I've heard that this movie will focus on Andy as an adult, with Woody, Buzz, and the gang being passed on to his children. Has anyone else heard this? Is there a source? I'd really like that to happen, but with no source I'm not putting anything in the article. Phoenix1304 (talk) 16:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Release section

here's a good reference Rotten Tomatoes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Berserkerz Crit (talk • contribs) 17:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but we have a citation already. Alientraveller (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] well, this is a bit inconvinent...

When I saw the first picture showing Buzz Lightyear toys being recalled, this kind of parallels to the recall on toys made in China last year due to lead paint.

Well, I'm not sure if this suppose to bring some political message into a supposedly kid's movie or just to add some suspense into the film.Dark paladin x (talk) 01:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably not as the recall plot was created and abandoned before the China recall. --Fez2005 (talk) 00:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)