Talk:List of Pixar films/Archive 1

Archive 1

The Grinch?

The article cited says nothing about this, and the linked article has nothing to do with pixar; it's a tv show from the 80's. I'm deleting the line from the table. 66.44.153.61 (talk) 01:47, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

UP BEST PICTURE???

I am not very well read on the different Academy Awards to the different Pixar films but I am pretty certain that Up didn't win "Best Picture." However due to my lack of knowledge I didn't change it. I thought I'd let someone a little bit more than me. 174.59.60.197 (talk) 23:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The edit is fine. You're misinterpreting what the table data is displaying. SpikeJones (talk) 02:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Concerning Immblueversion's recent box edits

Your enthusiasm is appreciated, but please do not mix-n-match timelines of theatrical feature releases with theatrical shorts with DVD-only productions as we do not necessarily know that (a) followed (b) followed (c) in the production process. If you feel the need to recreate those edits, try to keep them in the same family (DVD-only vs Feature vs Shorts). Thx. SpikeJones (talk) 02:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

WALL-E's current worldwide gross

Where is the worldwide gross for WALL-E obtained from? It's not from boxofficemojo as that's well out of date with the international totals and this total differs considerably.--Gaunt (talk) 18:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Cars Toons and other television shorts

I understand that the first of the Pixar created shorts for Disney Channel has recently aired. Now I've not seen them since i'm in the UK and I don't think there is a air date over here, therefore can't add much detail other than info from the reports. Just wondering how we should add these - usually everyone is so fast at updating the Pixar pages! Should the new "Cars Toons" series starring Mater be added to the short films list, or shall we start another table for the television shorts since there is no 'theatrical' or 'home release' premieres? A page does exist for the series ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cars_Toons ), so there is somewhere to link the new entries to until they have their own entries. SWatsi (talk) 22:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

this page is for films, not TV productions. For example, the Buzz Lightyear TV series is not included on this page. SpikeJones (talk) 01:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

That is a very good point. I understand that, and it's a good reason. Are you suggesting a seperate page for tv projects? I think it needs to be discussed where all productions belong in the larger scheme of things - here might be as good a place as any for the time being. Do all of the 'short films' on this page at present qualify as a film? What is the difference of three minutes of original animation that debuts on a DVD (such as Jack-Jack Attack) and three minutes of original animation that debuts on the television? Also if these three shorts were to be released theatrically or on a DVD at some point (as I have seen suggested in interviews), would they then qualify for this list?

Also even if TV was included I don't think the Buzz Lightyear tv series counts, as animation wasn't done by them - correct?

BTW. I'm just speculating here! Its good to be informed! SWatsi (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed that the DVD-specific shorts should be pulled from this listing, but that is not a battle I will take on. Take a look at whether the various Disney animation-related articles dealt with this issue already (or looney tunes, or any other film AND TV production house, did). If you can find an existing standard that other areas are already using, then that would be a good place to start. How is it represented in the main Pixar article? Where are other Pixar-created TV productions (listerine, opening credits for some TV show whose name I've forgotten, life savers, etc) listed? What would be ramifications of including/not including TV work on *this* page down the road if the product turns into a series or if there is a "Sulley's Silly Tales" set of TV shorts? Look at the big picture, then come back with your thoughts. SpikeJones (talk) 15:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

this article's opening

I still don't understand why Leftorium made [this edit] to the page, duplicating content from Pixar to here. As this is a "list of Pixar films" rather than an explanation of Pixar film-creation/history, it seems out of place here. When I go to a "list" page, I expect a list of some sort, not paragraphs of reading material. I had reverted this edit once, but Leftorium put it back - so instead of continuing to revert, thought I'd bring the discussion here first. Comments/thoughts? SpikeJones (talk) 12:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on getting this article to Featured list status. Read this for more information. —TheLeftorium 14:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, and I will update the page to have an engaging lead section that introduces the subject, and defines the scope and inclusion criteria of the list, similar to the Featured List used as an example on the page you pointed to. SpikeJones (talk) 14:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

To Theleftorium: Please explain how your copying of info from the Pixar page addresses the guidelines on WP:List#Lead sections in stand-alone lists and WP:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Lead and selection criteria. Thx. SpikeJones (talk) 15:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

It is an "engaging lead section that introduces the subject". Anyway, forget what I said about bringing this to FL status, because I wont be making any more edits to the article. —TheLeftorium 15:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

All that is asked is an explanation to support your edits, of which I don't see any; the link you provided says, in full, "[a list] has an engaging lead section that introduces the subject, and defines the scope and inclusion criteria of the list.". The interpretation is that a list page can't just be a list, but needs to have some explanation of what the list is and what qualifies to be on the list. The page as is currently, does that. Your edit was merely a rehash of Pixar without even stating what the list qualifications were. The example given on this page of List of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach is equally brief to the current edit here, without a need to include JSB's bio. The 2nd link that I pointed to states "Lists should begin with a lead section that presents unambiguous statements of membership criteria", of which the current version is. Please explain how your desired edits meet either of these two guidelines for list opening paragraphs? SpikeJones (talk) 15:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Fat

I really don't like the table here, it's too fat. Can we seperate the table somewhat, so one section we have all the films, with directors writers and all that punk. And then a seperate section for box office and other reception stuff?IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 23:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The excess information was removed by Drunkenpeter99 on 5 Sep 2009, and no longer lists awards, budget, writers, directors, or most ratings. Personally this seems too sparse, now, since there's less info than the In Production section has. The table still needs to find a good balance. Gousha (talk) 17:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

1904?

I've heard rumors of a future Pixar film called "1904". Does anyone have any more information? 74.33.174.133 (talk) 21:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

It's tentatively called 1906 and is a movie by The Incredibles' Brad Bird about the great San Francisco earthquake. That film, along with Pixar's "John Carter of Mars" trilogy, are supposed to be live-action. I understand 1906 not being listed on this Pixar article if Bird is doing it on his own but from what I have heard, "John Carter of Mars" is supposed to be a Pixar film. It should be listed in upcoming films (tentatively scheduled for 2011). Kwyjibear (talk) 22:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Monsters Inc. 2

According to this IMDB page a sequel to Monsters Inc is in production and scheduled for a 2012 release. Does anyone know anything else about this? --98.21.177.45 (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

There has been no announcement of any kind from Disney or Pete regarding the existence of Monsters 2. That is why there is no inclusion of this information in WP. Only after there is valid, citable evidence, can WP reflect that info. SpikeJones (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, it's just a rumor. 74.33.174.133 (talk) 13:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Recently IPs have been adding Monsters, Inc. 2 into the list, attaching this source as a reference. On this attempt, someone revised the name of the article to attempt to reference Monsters, Inc. 2 instead of Cars 2. Each time I've reverted it, I've asked people to show me where in this item Monsters, Inc. 2 is even mentioned. To save everyone the time of following the link (which, by the by, is already used as a legitimate source in the article), here is the complete text, cut and paste from the source:

Yesterday when we told you that Cars 2 had been moved forward to the Summer 2011, we forgot to tell you that Pixar’s Newt would be getting the old Cars 2 release date of Summer 2012. It wasn’t made clear why the change was made, but I’m assuming that newt probably required more development time, while all the characters of Cars have already been designed, cutting down the traditional pre-production timeline.

newt marks the directing debut of multiple Academy Award winning sound designer Gary Rydstrom, who made his Pixar debut with the short film Lifted (which premiered in front of Ratatouille). The plot synopsis that was released earlier this years follows: "What happens when the last remaining male and female blue-footed newts on the planet are forced together by science to save the species, and they can’t stand each other? Newt and Brooke embark on a perilous, unpredictable adventure and discover that finding a mate never goes as planned, even when you only have one choice. Love, it turns out, is not a science."

Feel free to highlight, bold or otherwise indicate where in that relatively short section of text Monsters, Inc. 2 is mentioned, much less where a release date is provided. Thanks. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Ehhh?

Why the fuck are the grosses only domestic. someone needs to change it to worldwide FAST. IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 12:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

John Carter of Mars

why is John Carter of mars not in here it is stated as a pixar production with a relase date and confimerd pre-production should it not be up there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.180.6 (talk) 06:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Almost all of the sourced information in the film article points to the only Pixar connection to the film being that Andrew Stanton is attached to it as a writer. No Pixar effects, no Pixar branding ... --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Film profits

An anonymous IP recently added a "Profit" column, whose value was basically obtained from subtracting the film's budget from its total box-office take. It's certainly a good-faith edit, but unfortunately determining a film's profit isn't quite that simple. There are other costs involved that aren't necessarily included in the budget, so a simple subtraction doesn't really get it. Then of course there is "Hollywood math," but that's a whole other issue. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Stop Changing Dates

I work for Pixar and I can 100% assure you that Cars 2 is going to be released in June of 2011.

Also, Newt has temporarily been shelved, and is without a doubt not going to be release in 2011.

--24.245.18.91 (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The BBC revised its story, stating there was a misunderstanding and that Cars 2 was still scheduled for June 2011. As for Newt, we'd need a verifiable source, preferably outside of Pixar. Unfortunately, we have no proof that you work for Pixar, so it would be difficult to take your word for it. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Toy Story 3 Writers

For the movie Toy Story 3, two writers are listed namely Michael Arndt and Andrew Stanton. But on the Toy Story 3 article as well as other websites like IMDB it shows only Michael Arndt as the writer. Anyone knows how many and who are they actually? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirinsanity (talk • contribs) 08:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Toy Story 1

Where is Toy Story 1? Its not on the list. Its definitely a Pixar Film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.4.138 (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The article was apparently vandalized by another editor. It's been fixed. Thanks for noticing it! --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Finding Nemo 'Sequel'

Anyone heard any news of a Nemo two or of a Nemo 1 1/2 (like what was done on Disney's "The Lion King").—Preceding unsigned comment ???

No. As long as there's no official info on one, we shouldn't talk about it. Georgia guy (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Academy Awards

I really think there should be another row for Academy Awards won by the movies. If anyone else agrees please reply here and I will add it. Nirinsanity 16:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirinsanity (talk • contribs)

Newt

Even if newt was cancelled we should still include something in one of the tables. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.110.80.38 (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

15th Pixar film

I heard in a forum today that they say Pixar's next film will be a Western, but no title has been revealed. Any info on when the title will be revealed?? I'll be surprised if no title will be revealed by the time Cars 2 is in theatres. Georgia guy (talk) 16:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Forums are no good for reliable sources, but if you find a good source it should most likely be added. My guess is that there won't be anything substantial written about a 15th film, for a while now.--JOJ ^Hutton 16:12, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The dates need to be fixed.

Toy Story was definitely NOT released in 1987! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.38.63 (talk) 01:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Two New Movies

New Movies are "Operation: C.H.R.I.S.T.M.A.S." and "The Pirates Movie" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.154.178 (talk) 02:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

The sources are only badly-written "suggestion" blog posts. Not real. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 02:29, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

real

i wrote a letter pixar about christmas film. it will be real — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.154.178 (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Writing a letter does not prove it will be real. Studios simply do not create films based on fan-letters. We need verifiable, reputable sources to prove this will happen. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I Found Two Movies

"Wilson's Kitchen" and "The Incredibles 2: Rise of the Underminer" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.246.120 (talk) 09:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

A Google news search on Wilson's Kitchen doesn't reveal this film. Georgia guy (talk) 12:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

two movies

The Incredibles 2: Rise of the Underminer (Released on September 20, 2013) [1] and Wilson Kitchen (Released on November 9, 2012) [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.246.120 (talk) 10:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Just as I wrote above, a Google search doesn't reveal these titles. Georgia guy (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

oh please

oh please let pixar make these movies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.251.123 (talk) 06:01, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Also, the honest reply is that they will not be made. Pixar has their own creative team(s) who create and develop their films. They don't go looking around at websites for ideas. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Toy Story 4 #16??

The HTML comment says not to put Toy Story 4 as the title of #15. However, it makes sense that the untitled original is #15 and Toy Story 4 is #16. Any opinions on what to do with having the table say that Toy Story 4 is #16?? If not, please improve the HTML comment. Georgia guy (talk) 23:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Toy Story 4 was only confirmed that it is in the works, still it may not be #15, 16, or even 17. However, many still think that Toy Story 4 is #15, where #15 was confirmed to not be a sequel, leaving Toy Story out of the list for #15. So in order to prevent further speculation, that is why I added that note. If you do not like it, feel free to remove it. Giggett (talk) 23:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

November 27, 2013

Pixar hasn't announced the film that comes after Monsters University yet, but it says on the article that the film that is coming after Monsters University will be released on this date. Are we 100% sure that's true, considering the fact that we don't even know what the film is yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.97.42 (talk) 19:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

We know the film, but we don't know its title yet. Please be extra-patient. The title should be revealed by the summer of 2012 if not earlier. Georgia guy (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Imdb

Why isn't Imdb a reliable source?? Does it lie a lot about release dates?? Georgia guy (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Information is user-submitted and not checked for accuracy. While you wont find an absurdly large amount of wrong information, it does happen. Sometimes film articles are created when the film isn't being created, sometimes people add dates that aren't correct. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Can I add the IMDB votes in the "Critical and public reception" section? GianoM (talk) 12:02, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Untitled TBA Pixar Film Project called "Operation: C.H.R.I.S.T.M.A.S"?

Untitled Project called "Operation: C.H.R.I.S.T.M.A.S" is a Upcoming Christmas-themed Film?

Google search doesn't reveal anything about this title. Georgia guy (talk) 13:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

2014 film status

IMO the 2014 film is the same as the November 2013 film only with the release date pushed back. (The external link reveals that this is one possibility.) Georgia guy (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Toy Story 4 not #16

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/20/pixar-announces-two-new-films_n_932198.html?ir=Entertainment reveals the title Dinosaurs for #15 and Inside the Brain for #16; although we don't know if this has been proven to be right because actual release dates can mismatch planned ones. In 2008, it was revealed that the sequence after Toy Story 3 was going to be Newt, The Bear and the Bow, Cars 2. Later, however, Newt was cancelled, The Bear and the Bow was re-titled Brave, and Cars 2 was pushed up so that it comes before Brave. For the time being, let's accept this order (revealed by http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/20/pixar-announces-two-new-films_n_932198.html?ir=Entertainment) as long as there's no proof that it's wrong. Georgia guy (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Lee Unkrich's "next project"

Earlier, an anon IP added a 17th Pixar film, ostensibly to be directed by Lee Unkrich. The source was an article discussing how Unkrich was using his Twitter feed and a Tumblr log to photographically capture his progress, one photo at a time. After reading the article, I removed it from the table of confirmed films (Brave, Monsters University and the unnamed films on dinosaurs and the human mind) and instead added it to the paragraph afterwards, since it's not clear exactly what project he's working on. Yes he's one of Pixar's top directors, and yes this could indeed be another Pixar feature film, but he could be added as a co-director to one of the aformentioned films, or this could be something totally different (a la 1906). Put simply, it's speculation to say that this is the next Pixar feature, but the information is no less valid, and could indeed be the first step to something we'll cover in the near future here. --McDoobAU93 19:19, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Info should be known by this time next year. Please be patient. Georgia guy (talk) 19:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Pixar Canada films

We know that there are several kinds of films that don't belong in the Disney animated features canon. However, is there any official info on whether Pixar Canada films belong in the Pixar canon?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:40, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

As I understand it, Pixar Canada and Pixar Emeryville would be no different than the various Walt Disney Animation Studios branches that existed in France and in Florida that supported the main studio in California. The France studio worked on Tarzan, while the Florida studio at Walt Disney World had a hand in most everything from The Little Mermaid through to Home on the Range, to say nothing of its three films where it was the lead studio: Mulan, Lilo & Stitch and Brother Bear. If Pixar Canada is supporting Pixar Emeryville, then it wouldn't matter. If they start doing direct-to-home releases or TV animation, then it would be different. Let's wait until their first project gets going before we set things in stone. --McDoobAU93 19:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Inside the Mind

Google news site are revealing more about this Pixar film. Definitely too much to be inside this article, which is merely a list of films with no info on what the films are. And because this film isn't a sequel, we can't merge it anywhere. Any suggestions on creating an article?? Georgia guy (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Long answer: Per the Films WikiProject, articles on upcoming films shouldn't be started until the film is confirmed to be in production. Animated films must have reached the stage where actual scenes from the film are being drawn/rendered, and, pending reliable sources stating otherwise, it's unlikely any of these unnamed Pixar works have gotten that far yet. Short answer: no article yet. --McDoobAU93 17:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Dinosaurs film release

We now know that "Frozen" will be released in the fall of 2013. For the 2014 schedule, there are 3 flavors, and we should know which flavor is correct by the end of 2012:

1. "Dinosaurs" is released in the summer and "Inside the Mind" is released in the fall.
2. "Inside the Mind" is released in the summer and "Dinosaurs" is released in the fall.
3. One Pixar film will be released in the summer of 2014 and the other of these will be postponed until 2015.

Georgia guy (talk) 16:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The flurry of edits around the announcement/leak of Frozen merely says that it has taken the Pixar dinosaur film's release date, nothing more. Anything else is speculation and forum chatter. --McDoobAU93 16:54, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Title of film #17

Unfortunately what this article mentions as film #17's title is wordy that I doubt people will remember it. Georgia guy (talk) 12:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Finding Nemo 2

The name of the Findong Nemo 2-film, is it "Escape From Oilglobs"? SpikeJones (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Newt

I have some good news. The film Newt is back in production. Its releases in 2017. Fly i flint (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

That's fake news. Google News search on Pixar doesn't reveal it. Georgia guy (talk) 12:35, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

The Pixar 2017 films ars Cars 3 and Coco. Newt is not on their website — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.133.157 (talk) 20:48, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Shut up!!! Newt is back in production!!! I saw it at the cinema when i went too see Brave!!! Fly i flint (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you prove it's the Pixar film and not just any film with that title?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Finding Nemo 2 Unconfirmed

Although it has been treated as "news," THR and Deadline both reported on this film (Finding Nemo 2) with NO SOURCES, and Andrew Stanton tweeted (albiet somewhat ambiguously) that it was not happening. How can this film be categorized as "in production" when there is no proof that it is in fact in production, with proof that says the contrary? --Legoguy92 (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

What proof is there that FN2 is not in production?? Georgia guy (talk) 23:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Andrew Stanton's Tweet. This was posted later on in the day after Deadline supposedly "broke" the story. Just because a website says it's true, it does not mean that it is true. Neither Pixar nor Disney confirmed that the film is in production, nor did anyone who works for Pixar or Disney. A film is categorized as "rumored" until announced by a studio, NOT "in production." --Legoguy92 (talk) 00:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia's article Andrew Stanton reveals he's someone who works at Pixar. Georgia guy (talk) 00:29, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your point is. The point I am making is that Stanton is alluding to the fact that the movie is NOT in production, as he was rumored to be the director. Read the tweet. He's saying not to believe everything you read and there is "nothing to see here," meaning the movie is NOT currently being produced. Until there is substantial evidence from the studio or Stanton himself that the film is happening, the film is rumored. Deadline.com saying that "an anonymous reliable source" told them is most certainly NOT a reliable source. --Legoguy92 (talk) 00:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Table size

I thought the table here was massive with far too much information, this should just be an overview of the Pixar films. I removed the imdb column as it generally shouldn't be used as a source and I don't think it added anything when there are columns for Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. I also removed the runtime column as I really don't think it is needed. I question whether the directors, storywriters and screenplay writers are all needed but I have left them for the time being. Sanders11 (talk) 11:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Toy story 4 the. Untitled film?

Is toy story 4 the untitled film?

What do you think? They have to make it. After 3 have over $1,000,000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.79.4 (talk) 17:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

No. It's probably the same film as the "Dia de los Muertos" film, but because of Wikipedia's "Verifiability, not just truth" requirement, Wikipedia is supposed to accept without proof that it's different until sources reveal otherwise. Georgia guy (talk) 20:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Planes

Just was looking at my Pixar Short Films Volume 2, and there is a trailer for a 2013 movie called Planes. It was alluded to at the end of the Mater Tales - Air Mater. Someone might want to add it to the In-Production section. Rcollett (talk) 17:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

No, it's not a Pixar film. Georgia guy (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Untitled film

This table has had for a long time an untitled film it's for the fall of 2015. Any proof that this film is not the same as Dia de los Muertos, which is now expected to be released in 2016?? Georgia guy (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Untitled 2015 film

This untitled film is probably the same as "Dia de los Muertos"; and the source that revealed the film didn't bother to reveal the film's subject. However, Carinolus says that although the 2 films are probably the same, as part of Wikipedia's WP:VNT, Wikipedia is supposed to assume that they are different. It appears that all un-registered Wikipedians are assuming that they are definitely different, as I can tell by a number of edits. Any thoughts from anyone besides me and Carinolus?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding Dory

I believe this title came from:

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/04/02/title-image-from-pixars-finding-dory-the-sequel-to-finding-nemo/

Although this site says it's official per info in the top of the article, please note this text from the bottom of the page:

Disclaimer: This site is full of news, gossip and rumour. You are invited to use your discretion and intelligence when discerning which is which. BleedingCool.com cannot be held responsible for falling educational standards. Bleeding Cool is neither fair nor balanced, but it is quite fun.

This means that this isn't sufficient for this film. Any thoughts?? Georgia guy (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Not sure on bleedingcool.com but a link from Disney.com's main page including the title image as well as reports in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/comic-riffs/post/finding-dory-disneypixar-lands-ellen-degeneres-for-2015-sequel-to-finding-nemo/2013/04/02/516cd51e-9bbf-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html) and the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-finding-nemo-sequel-release-date-dory-ellen-degeneres-20130402,0,2156856.story) might be good enough.Naraht (talk) 02:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Article problem

Finding Dory, whose release date is 2 1/2 years from now, now has its own article; while Inside Out, whose release is only 2 years from now, doesn't. Any thoughts on how much sense this makes?? Georgia guy (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead and write one, be bold, as long as there's reliable sources however; that's where most editors get picky about. - Rebel shadow 03:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Page title should be changed to "List of Pixar feature films":

This seems appropriate since the short films aren't included in the article.

Critical Reception discussion.

The Critical Reception section has been deleted and restored several times in the last week. Discussion here, I guess.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Tables featuring Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic scores. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Release Date Changes

The table for upcoming films needs to be updated. The Good Dinosaur was moved to the date Finding Dory had (so now there isn't a Pixar film in 2014, and it comes out after Inside Out). Finding Dory was moved to the date that the Día de los Muertos film had. Alphius (talk) 18:57, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Dia de los Muertos release date

Any proof that this film will indeed be released in 2017 based on recent reliable sources?? (In other words, it's not just Wikipedia's estimate.) Georgia guy (talk) 12:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Día de los Muertos is titled Coco and will be released on November 22, 2017.

Edit request on 26 September 2013

67.248.80.50 (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Not done: No edit has been proposed. --McDoobAU93 21:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 September 2013

67.248.80.50 (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Not done: No edit has been proposed. --McDoobAU93 21:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

New film

[3 is in the works] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.167.114 (talk) 13:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Table improvement

Any interest in morphing the table to resemble the one at theList of Walt Disney Animation Studios films article? Somehow when the Pixar films table got more detailed it got more divided. Rebel shadow 00:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I actually prefer the current version of the table. For me, the main point of a table is that the same information stands next to each other, in one column, so it is easy to compare. Disney's format takes too much time to find, for an example, producer of an individual film.--Carniolus (talk) 15:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Understandable, let's hope it doesn't get too bloated. -- Rebel shadow 07:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Cars III

2017_in_film#April_.E2.80.93_June — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.38.140 (talk) 16:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Pixar the Menace

--77.101.38.140 (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Dennis the Menace

COLORS

What in the world are the colors on the 'reception' table for? I think it looks bad, just my opinion.

66.203.18.56 (talk) 18:18, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree... something needs to be done about it. Zmcdermo (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Upcoming

Someone completely pulled a space cadet on the upcoming table but I don't know how to fix it

66.203.18.56 (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

If you're referring to the hoax film names, it's fixed now. If not, feel free to describe what you believe is wrong and we'll discuss it here. --McDoobAU93 19:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah the hoax stuff is what I meant thanks

66.203.18.56 (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2015

Pixar is a CGI production company based in Emeryville, California, United States.

should be

Pixar is an American computer animation film studio based in Emeryville, California, United States.

Rrrwwww (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done for now: I don't understand the difference and I don't see how the longer text improves the encyclopedia. Can you please explain a little better? Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 14:42, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Cast members(?)

I think there should be a section highlighting cast members (not crew members who have applied voices but actors who have been prominently featured) John Ratzenberger is the most frequent.

Actor	Toy Story	A Bug's Life	Toy Story 2	Monsters, Inc.	Finding Nemo	The Incredibles	Cars	Ratatouille	WALL·E	Up	Toy Story 3	Cars 2	Brave	Monsters University	Inside Out	The Good Dinosaur	Finding Dory
Tim Allen	Yes		Yes				Yes				Yes
Jack Angel	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes				Yes			Yes
Albert Brooks					Yes												Yes
Billy Crystal				Yes			Yes							Yes
Debi Derryberry	Yes	Yes	Yes
Ellen DeGeneres					Yes												Yes
Dave Foley		Yes	Yes				Yes
John Goodman				Yes			Yes							Yes
Tom Hanks	Yes		Yes				Yes				Yes
Sherry Lynn	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes
John Morris	Yes		Yes								Yes
Annie Potts	Yes		Yes
Jan Rabson	Yes		Yes	Yes					Yes	Yes	Yes			Yes	Yes
John Ratzenberger	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	TBA
Don Rickles	Yes		Yes								Yes
Wallace Shawn	Yes		Yes			Yes					Yes
Jim Varney	Yes		Yes
Erik von Detten	Yes										Yes

• Oppose For several reasons: 1. The way this table is formatted, it is already too wide, and will be wider with each new Pixar's film. 2. Except for Ratzenberger, there are no other actors that have really recurring roles in the Pixar's films. Film sequels do not count, since it is logical that they would feature old actors, who appear because they have to and not because Pixar prefers to cooperate with them. That leaves a few professional voice actors, who lend their voices to many animated films. In the Pixar's films, they mostly have a line or two, and are mostly credited as additional voices, so I don't think they are notable.--Carniolus (talk) 10:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Is this a reliable source??

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/the.incredibles.2.updates.movie.to.be.released.end.of.2017.or.mid.2018.3d.version.in.the.works/60640.htm Georgia guy (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I would say no. If you follow links that this article is citing you would find that one does not mention any release dates, and other two are using phrases like "rumors claimed", "was rumored" and "the speculated release date..." One of them is even citing Wikia...--Carniolus (talk) 16:04, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I do not think that is realize at all. ThisGuyIsGreat (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Coco (2017 film)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Future film. Very little available (sourced) content for an independent article. - MrX 13:51, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

It is a feature film and will eventually require its own separate article so why not leave it here now. More information will be revealed between now and release. A screenshot from the movie is available, can someone add it as my account is unconfirmed otherwise I would do it, thanks.Matt14451 (talk) 17:31, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The film doesn't exist. Articles require references to show that a subject meets our notability guidelines. I am closing this, because I have redirected the title to an existing article created by the same editor, which is currently under discussion at AfD.- MrX 17:40, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

WP:NFF and this article.

I've read through WP:NFF and while I generally think it needs work, as currently written, it *only* applies to whether *articles* should exist for films not yet in production. The only films in the table that are not sequels are Finding Dory (which I'd be amazed that there aren't final production frames in existence given it is 4 months away) and Coco. WP:NFF may apply to whether a separate article should exist for Coco, but IMO, it does not govern what should be in this article.Naraht (talk)

I'll give those who are so zealous about this the benefit of a doubt. But the title "In production" is inaccurate; films are not in production until principal photography begins. I changed to "Planned films". And there's another policy involved (WP:NFF is a guideline): WP:CRYSTAL. Films in 2020 that are simply described as "Animation" with no detail except a projected date clearly violate that policy.

This is how I think the table should look

Title	Release date(s)	Director(s)	Writer(s)	Producer(s)
Toy Story	November 22, 1995 October 2, 2009 (in 3-D)	John Lasseter	Story: John Lasseter, Pete Docter, Andrew Stanton and Joe Ranft Screenplay: Joss Whedon, Andrew Stanton, Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow	Ralph Guggenheim and Bonnie Arnold
A Bug's Life	November 25, 1998	John Lasseter Co-Director: Andrew Stanton	Story: John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Joe Ranft Screenplay: Andrew Stanton, Donald McEnery and Bob Shaw	Darla K. Anderson and Kevin Reher
Toy Story 2	November 24, 1999 October 2, 2009 (in 3-D)	John Lasseter Co-Directors: Lee Unkrich and Ash Brannon	Story: John Lasseter, Pete Docter, Andrew Stanton and Ash Brannon Screenplay: Andrew Stanton, Rita Hsiao, Doug Chamberlin and Chris Webb	Helene Plotkin and Karen Robert Jackson
Monsters, Inc.	November 2, 2001 December 19, 2012 (in 3-D)	Pete Docter Co-Directors: Lee Unkrich and David Silverman	Story: Pete Docter, Jill Culton, Jeff Pidgeon and Ralph Eggleston Screenplay: Andrew Stanton and Daniel Gerson	Darla K. Anderson
Finding Nemo	May 30, 2003 September 14, 2012 (in 3-D)	Andrew Stanton Co-Director: Lee Unkrich	Story: Andrew Stanton Screenplay: Andrew Stanton, Bob Peterson and David Reynolds	Graham Walters
The Incredibles	November 5, 2004	Brad Bird		John Walker
Cars	June 9, 2006	John Lasseter Co-Director: Joe Ranft	Story: John Lasseter, Joe Ranft and Jorgen Klubien Screenplay: Dan Fogelman, John Lasseter, Joe Ranft, Kiel Murray, Phil Lorin and Jorgen Klubien	Darla K. Anderson
Ratatouille	June 29, 2007	Brad Bird Co-Director: Jan Pinkava	Screenplay: Brad Bird Story: Jan Pinkava, Jim Capobianco and Brad Bird	Brad Lewis
WALL-E	June 27, 2008	Andrew Stanton	Story: Andrew Stanton and Pete Docter Screenplay: Andrew Stanton and Jim Reardon	Jim Morris
Up	May 29, 2009	Pete Docter Co-Director: Bob Peterson	Story: Pete Docter, Bob Peterson and Tom McCarthy Screenplay: Bob Peterson and Pete Docter	Jonas Rivera
Toy Story 3	June 18, 2010	Lee Unkrich	Story: John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich Screenplay: Michael Arndt	Bonnie Arnold
Cars 2	June 24, 2011	John Lasseter Co-Director: Brad Lewis	Story: John Lasseter, Brad Lewis and Dan Fogelman Screenplay: Ben Queen	Denise Ream
Brave	June 22, 2012	Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman Co-Director: Steve Purcell	Story: Brenda Chapman Screenplay: Mark Andrews, Steve Purcell, Brenda Chapman and Irene Mecchi	Katherine Sarafian
Monsters University	June 21, 2013	Dan Scanlon	Dan Scanlon, Daniel Gerson and Robert L. Baird	Kori Rae
Inside Out	June 19, 2015	Pete Docter Co-Director: Ronnie del Carmen	Story: Pete Docter and Ronnie del Carmen Screenplay: Pete Docter, Meg LeFauve and Josh Cooley	Jonas Rivera
The Good Dinosaur	November 25, 2015	Peter Sohn	Original Concept & Development: Bob Peterson Story: Peter Sohn, Erik Benson, Meg LeFauve, Kelsey Mann and Bob Peterson Screenplay: Meg LeFauve	Denise Ream
Finding Dory	June 17, 2016	Andrew Stanton	Story: Andrew Stanton Screenplay: Andrew Stanton and Victoria Strouse	Lindsey Collins

--TVBuff90 (talk) 15:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

• @TVBuff90: The look does look cleaner than the one in the article. If you feel this is the best look, be bold. -- 1989 16:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming films

I can't find any confirmation that Inside Out 2 was ever confirmed. The source clearly states untitled film. Ninjonxb (talk) 14:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Untitled dragon film

Is it okay to update the list of upcoming films to saying that Pixar's 22nd film will be an untitled dragon film?? The following URL says so:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/pixars-next-original-movie-is-a-suburban-fantasy-advent-1796937779

Georgia guy (talk) 23:41, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Personally I don’t think the source is trustworthy, I think it may be lying. Anonymous 7481 (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Do you think that source lies a lot?? Georgia guy (talk) 23:16, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I’m not sure but my friends told me it is most likely lying. You can call it untitled Dragon Film if you find a better source like Rotten Tomatoes. Anonymous 7481 (talk) 12:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

IMDb on Critical and public reception

Can I add IMDb’s score to the Critical and public reception? This may be a stupid question but I’m pretty new to Wikipedia and I was just wondering if I could add it. (I want to add it because I personally use and like IMDb)

Anonymous 7481 (talk) 20:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Still waiting for an answer 😂 Anonymous 7481 (talk) 13:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

@Anonymous 7481: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 02:39, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Name shorting

Why do we have to keep the last name of every writer who done the screenplay and story? Its getting annoying. B-Master2018 (talk) 23:49, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

It would be utterly uninformative to write "Andrew, Joss, John and Joel" there. People cannot be adequately identified without the full combination of their first and last names. I am afraid I cannot sympathize with your revulsion of the last name. 5.78.240.70 (talk) 21:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Box office performance

Why shouldn't we count rereleases? --Mazewaxie 19:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Screenwriter credits

I think the screenwriter section should be split in two, making the two halves story and screenplay. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 04:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Composer column in table

An IP is persisting on adding this column which has been removed repeatedly with comment: "In fact, the composer column isn't needed in a table like this. Wikipedia standard is title, date, director, screenwriter (combining story and written by credits) and producer" so if want it in article, start talk page discussion". IP hasn't started a discussion so this is the place for that. See if a consensus can form to add it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Colors

Colors again. They're a bad idea when they're overused and they've been objected to before repeatedly see Talk:List_of_Pixar_films/Archive_1#COLORS. See also Template:Overcolored, they aren't harmless, they're actively bad for some readers.

Even if a colored Reception table was a good idea in general and lots of other film articles were doing it that way, (it isn't and they aren't) in this article it is a particularly bad idea because the colors are all too similar. There's only one significant outlier and that's Cars 2. Wikipedia says it is better to use WP:PROSE to explain things, and if anyone thinks there is a pattern or an outlier that is worth highlighting they should be able to do so more effectively in a few sentences. -- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

It was readded back in March 2019 by an anonymous editor who didn't understand it was removed very deliberately and intentionally, with full awareness of the past complaints about colors on the Talk page. -- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 00:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

You mention Template:Overcolored, but quite frankly, you haven't read it yourself. Our policy regarding colors is Wikipedia:CONTRAST to which the colored table adheres. Specifically:

Some readers of Wikipedia are partially or fully color-blind or visually impaired. Ensure the contrast of the text with its background reaches at least Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0's AA level, and AAA level when feasible (see WCAG's "Understanding SC 1.4.3: Contrast (Minimum)").

The objection in Talk:List of Pixar films/Archive 1#COLORS is from 20 November 2014. It is referring to this revision: [3] I agree. It is awful.

5.219.76.254 (talk) 05:53, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Alright, I might have been a little harsh above. Let's take it from the top: Please take a moment to read WP:CONTRAST and consider if there is truly any reproducible and practical problem with the colors in the article, something more tangible than "they're a bad idea". Then, if you have any real actual concern, we will discuss it, and if necessary, call in a WP:3O. 5.219.76.254 (talk) 08:10, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

The colors are pointless decoration and add no value to the reader. Only one outlier and basically a sea of green so basically most readers will just ignore the colors. Contrast isn't an issue and colors are redundant so color blind people are not missing information so no accessibility issues. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:42, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Well, I am glad you agree with me on the lack of accessibility issue. But as for having no value, please pay attention to what you just said: Readers see "basically a sea of green". You concluded that, as a result, they ignore them, but this is because you already know how well Pixar films are received. Readers who don't know it see a sea of green and at once discover that all Pixar films are very well received. Without that sea of green, they need to spend time comparing and contrasting percentages to find out.

Now, I have noticed that it is common for inexperienced people to undervalue the knowledge that is easily gained. These colors deliver the gist of information in a microsecond. Hence, you conclude that they must be worthless. But that's the opposite. The speed is their power. 5.75.46.40 (talk) 05:31, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The data is quick to read and understand. The colors need a legend to understand. They will be ignored and only the numbers looked at. Pointless decoration and just more stuff to maintain for no benefit. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:52, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

If you don't want to maintain it, don't. I'll carry out whatever imaginary maintenance is needed.

As for them being ignored, I'm one of the readers who did not ignore it. Quite to the contrary, I saw them, found them useful and now we're here. In fact, there is evidence that at least three people haven't ignored it. So, if you think the rest of the world ignores it, show me some evidence. Not that it matters in the end. If the rest of the world goes only as far as ignoring it, then it is harmless. Let it be. Wikipedia is not censored. 5.75.46.40 (talk) 04:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

It absurd to even suggest this is censorship. No content is being censored.

You can selectively quote the guidelines and pretend that people are merely objecting to the particular choice of colors and not the whole ugly mess but this overdecoration looks bad and people have repeatedly complained about and removed it. It is an eyesore that adds nothing.
Please do go and get 3rd opinions. -- 109.77.252.211 (talk) 06:52, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Box office table not sorting properly

When the Worldwide Gross column of the Box Office table is selected, it does not properly sort totals because of the differing denominations used (millions vs. billions). I've switched all totals to millions to fix this, but if anyone has a better idea feel free to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bachwiz18 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Composers

I found it interesting that listed are the music composers of each film, as I would argue that composer isn't one of the main identifying features of a film. Anyone have thoughts on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.75.165.70 (talk) 21:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Screenwriters

Why can’t you separate the screenwriter section so that it would have the screenplay and story credits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian K. Tyler (talk • contribs) 07:25, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Story writers

I really think the story by credits should be back on here because they're just as important as the screenwriter credits, probably more so. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 02:30, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

United States

Somebody wrote:

"Not released theatrically in the United States in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic."

Can anyone extend this to either of 2 statements:

1. "Not released theatrically in the United States or Canada in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic."
2. "Not released theatrically in the United States in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, but released in Canada."

Georgia guy (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

For clarification, please note that I have a concern that someone will respond to the mention of the United States by asking "How about in Canada??" Tony1173, do you have any opinions here?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Should this page be protected against anonymous users?

This page is constantly getting screwed up by people who don't have usernames while editing this article. Can we do something about this? I have tried so hard to make this page right again, but they won't stop screwing it up again. Red4Smash (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

PLEEEAAAASSSSEEEEE!!!!! Red4Smash (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Red4Smash: If you think this page should be semi-protected, you can request that over at WP:RFPP. And if you can show some specific examples of IP editors vandalizing the page, that will increase the chances of the protection request being accepted. --Zander251 (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Newt

Hey! What happened to the development of Newt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clrichey (talk • contribs) 04:04, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Encanto

Encanto is not yet in the Films chart. 2600:6C5C:6B00:881:44E7:50F7:6E6:2729 (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

That's because it's regular Disney, not Pixar.$chnauzer 15:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Lulu

The untitled 2023 film has been revealed as Lulu. Why has it not been changed yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.116.214.66 (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Got proof? Don't use wikia as your proof; their page on "Lulu" got deleted for having no proof.$chnauzer 22:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2022

Please remove Aphton Corbin from the list of in-development project. I want her name removed because it appears that she isn't directing a feature film anymore. 67.71.178.241 (talk) 20:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2022

In List of Pixar films#Academy Awards, change Other to Special Achievement as that is the only entry so don't need an other column User 86 10 25 197 (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Since the column is marked as other, it shows that the other entries don't have any other awards. If the column was renamed it would only show that the other entries don't have any Special Achivements. Terasail^[✉️] 20:03, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Disagree, the reader can see the other films don't have other awards by their absence, my suggestion would make the table cleaner, would welcome opinion from anyone else User 86 10 25 197 (talk) 21:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Awful Colors

Please see Template:Overcolored. Just because you can does not mean you should. Someone has gone and added the unnecessary and unhelpful and frankly garish colors back the Reception table.[4] (February 2022)

• An editor complained about the awful colors in 2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Pixar_films/Archive_1#COLORS
• I complained about and removed the awful colors in 2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Pixar_films/Archive_1#Colors_2

I thought Wikipedia had moved on from this kind of excessive and unnecessary formatting. -- 109.78.192.128 (talk) 22:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I intend to clean this up myself when the article lock expires, but I would not mind if anyone reverts the excessive colors anytime before then. -- 109.79.72.233 (talk) 04:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Removed excessive colors again.[5] I hope it will not be necessary to come back in another three years and remove them yet again. -- -- 109.76.132.77 (talk) 19:18, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Co-director credits

I think the co-director credits should be visible just like the co-director credits listed on other animation studio production lists. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I strongly oppose this change.

It does indeed look okay when there are not that many projects that have co-directors (List of DreamWorks Animation productions for example). Not all animation studio production lists even have co-directors listed in your suggested way (compare List of Blue Sky Studios productions and even List of Walt Disney Animation Studios films) - so it's clearly not a common strategy. BUT in case of Pixar, this takes up way too much space (as there are quite a few projects with co-directors) and takes away from clarity - having notes next to directors names works much better and hasn't ever been a problem. Fanowaty (talk) 18:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Pixar Boats Movie

Was this even announced? I haven't seen any trailers or posters or images for this movie!!!! 70.41.154.159 (talk) 18:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Has Pixar/Disney ever announced a name outside of a big event?

It seems like all of the recent Pixar films that I've heard of have been at large Pixar or Disney special events, i.e. when Pixar/Disney *wants* them to be announced to the biggest fanfare. Have we gotten any of the names announced (since say Inside Out) in a less organized way?Naraht (talk) 13:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

credits

I feel a little uncomfortable of the people having their last names credit even though we already knew who made the films. but i don't feel like having their first names out even if it's a little confusing. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. It's obvious who we mean as their first mention is always by full name. There is no need to further expand the table and make it even larger and less clear when reading. Fanowaty (talk) 16:10, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Since this issue was not discussed properly by other editors, I am reverting the table to how it looked before your changes. Any major edits (like yours) need to be properly discussed with other editors, which wasn't the case. Fanowaty (talk) 16:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Reverted your huge series of edits, you reverted so many edits it's hard to tell what's from when etc but doesn't seem recent. Not all effected the filmography table you mentioned. Please use edit summaries or explain more here so it's clear. For example, you removed 71 references, and not said why, that's seem like a big WP:Verifiability issue. You removed scope="row"'s and caption which are MOS:ACCESS issues. Bold edits do not need to be properly discussed with other editors before making them per WP:BOLD.

Regarding the specific point raised here, I don't edit things like that usually but I'd say that seems correct as each cell in a table should be able to be read independently, i.e. people should be able to read the writer column without having read the directors column first. Consistent with featured list List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films. Indagate (talk) 21:01, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

agreed. the table must be expanded for people to read better. first names are important. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 21:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

First names are important, but they don't need to be repeated if they are mentioned more than once. Plus people can read just fine with the table condensed. 208.92.185.246 (talk) 18:50, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

it doesn't matter. we listen to what Indagate siad. No numbers, no removing the first names. even if they're repeated, they don't mind it. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 22:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Dan Scanlon's upcoming Pixar movie

Dan Scanlon confirmed that he's working on a future film for Pixar during an interview with Deadline:

https://deadline.com/2021/02/onward-director-dan-scanlon-disney-pixar-animation-interview-news-1234691366/amp/ 97.71.198.35 (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2023

toy story 5 coming 2025 152.244.84.83 (talk) 14:52, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:03, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Metro - an unreleased pixar film

I think metro is a worthwhile film project that should be mentioned on the article, the difficulty being the real lack of sources, other then this one I found [6].

Is there any other decent sources about this cancelled project that don't originate from 4Chan or Reddit?

BlunanNation (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2024

Toy Story 5 on June 19, 2026 136.38.131.13 (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done. ⸗ Antrotherkus ^{❲ Talk to me! ❳} ⸗ 23:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

List of Pixar films 136.38.131.13 (talk) 23:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)