|
Post by sgtyayap on Apr 24, 2010 16:28:03 GMT -5
Well, for now, I'd have to agree to not take IMDB's info about M.I.2 seriously. Of all the people I searched for in Bampot's method (John Goodman (obviously), Steve Buscemi, and, according to rumors I heard on Pixar Planet, Gary Oldman and James Earl Jones), only Goodman was listed as being casted. Still, IF it's reliable, at least I'll have pleasure in knowing that Oldman won't be in it; he IS a VERY good actor, but I fear that, if he DOES get casted, he'd do the voice of Randall; he and Buscemi, ignoring the accents, DO have similar voices.
|
|
Bampot
Randall's Friend (800-1999)
<3
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by Bampot on Apr 24, 2010 16:30:40 GMT -5
IMDb is fueled my rumors just as much as Wikipedia. I don't think anyone is gong to know for sure at this point. But I'm wondering why Wiki say Buscemi and IMDb doesn't. I'm sure they would get Steve again for Randall, so I think it's more likely that he would be cut out of the film if IMDb is correct, which I doubt it completely is. If Waternoose makes it, Randall for sure will.
I know this might cause some ruckus, but it's something I've been thinking about if Randall is not cast in this film: What if the sequel confirms that he's dead?
|
|
|
Post by sgtyayap on Apr 24, 2010 16:36:59 GMT -5
I doubt he'd be considered dead; no matter how he's portrayed, ALL of the post-film canon stuff that has been made has indicated that he's still alive, from the Boom! Comics to Scream Arena. Still, given the former, I think I'd PREFER that he'd be dead.
|
|
Bampot
Randall's Friend (800-1999)
<3
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by Bampot on Apr 24, 2010 16:41:45 GMT -5
Hmm, I guess it is out of the picture. Especially considering that his death would be blood directly on the protagonist hands. Not that Mike or Sully really considered what could happen to him on the other side of that door in the first place :/
|
|
|
Post by sgtyayap on Apr 24, 2010 17:21:37 GMT -5
Well, I don't think they'd spare him for moral reasons; they DID, after all, make a joke out of him getting crushed by the trash compactor in Ride and Go Seek.
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Apr 24, 2010 17:29:23 GMT -5
I'll put it this way-and y'all can consider me extreme or not, since I honestly have no intentions of backing down-IF Pixar either indicates that Randall is dead in the sequel, ESPECIALLY if neither Mike nor Sulley acknowledges any remorse over his death at all and are still treated as perfect "heroes", OR if Randall is brought back once more, as an unrepetent, evil-to-the-core villain to be dragged through the mud yet again, and almost surely killed or locked away for good in the end, as in the BOOM comics or the ride in Tokyo, I will NEVER, ever spend another penny on anything Pixar OR Disney, and I mean it, seriously. I'm sure the loss of me as a fan won't mean much to them, but that's just the way it will be. A person has to stick up for what they believe in. IF Randall isn't mentioned at all, as if he never existed, I might buy the DVD when it comes out or watch the sequel when it airs on Starz on DirectTV, or then again, I might not, since I can tell you I'm not enough of a fan of Mike, Sulley or Boo alone to justify spending much of my hard-earned, scarce cash on the sequel. I'll still probably buy Pixar stuff and go see their other movies, though. The only thing that will get me into a theater to see this first-run, and completely exonerate Pixar in my eyes, would be to bring Randall back and give him a second chance, a chance at redemption and happiness and an opportunity to resolve the conflict once and for all and prove that he's got a different side to him. Nothing short of that will be worthy, not for me it won't. Pixar's ability to pull off that character arc we've all been wanting to see will be what makes 'em or breaks 'em, as far as their ability to continue to write original stories that I can get behind. How they deal with Randall in the sequel will be the deciding factor as to whether I can remain a fan and supporter of Disney/Pixar or not.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
Post by lizardgirl on Apr 24, 2010 17:33:19 GMT -5
My gut instinct is that I want Randall to return because I want to see more of him. When the original first came out and I was young and naive, ALL I wanted was a sequel just so I could see more Randall.
Now I'm older and against the idea of a sequel because it's just completely unnecesary, but a sequel without Randall would definitely be missing something in my opinion, no matter how Randall is portrayed (though obviously for Randall to be portrayed in a entirely bad light is something we don't want to see happening).
As for the Monsters, Inc. ride and the BOOM! comics, I really wouldn't really on either of these things as a source of information about what the sequel might contain. I like to think that Pixar are retaining at least some of their creativity, and so though they may have committed to certain ideas in the past, I don't think they're going to be restricted by these things when it comes to the plot of the new film.
|
|
Bampot
Randall's Friend (800-1999)
<3
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by Bampot on Apr 24, 2010 17:42:56 GMT -5
While I probably wouldn't go to the extremes of never watching a Disney or Pixar film again, I most likely wouldn't be influenced in buying the sequel when it's released on DVD if Randall were absent. I'm defiantly feeling torn too, Lizardgirl. I had to choose between no Randall and an unchanged Randall, I admit my mind prefers the former while my heart longs the latter.
|
|
|
Post by mentalguru on Apr 24, 2010 17:55:30 GMT -5
While I disagree with the premise that M.I. doesn't need a sequel at all personally speaking I'm kind of tempted to almost do what PBL does if it bombs.
I'll possibly still contribute to an internet fandom setting (if this place is still around? Please.) but I don't think I could buy Pixar again if they completely blew apart everything.
Worst case senario is that: Randall comes back as a comedic villain, is killed/ left to rot in a prison with the CDA for all of time in the end (by Boo? ...), Sulley does not show any guilt, nor any real trouble as CEO, Mike is made out to be perfect, Boo is kept the same age she was in the movie and doesn't become even a more developed character by even a little bit. Oh and they make out Boos parents to be extremely ABUSIVE or something really STUPID. NO issues for humans in the monster world so Boo just runs off to join Sulley there and its not an ISSUE AT ALL (yeah, the whole not really toxic thing or trying to be nice to humans- not going to go well everywhere.)
I've already said the plot of my dreams in PP.
The above is the plot of my nightmares.
Is this tempting fate?
Granted, I doubt Pixar would fall THAT badly (I mean I'm guessing they wouldn't do the whole 'Boo's parents are extremely phsyically abusive thing' after all because not only is it stupid, it is obviously not really kid appropriate if they went that way. Duh.) Plus even Boom! had Sulley having problems as CEO, if they can't even meet Booms level (as unimpressive as it is) we'd be in deep trouble.
Unlike PBL and others I will possibly go to see it in theatres first no matter what people say to see it for myself (and the morbid curiosity?) but if they bomb it, yeah all I'd contribute would be AU fanfic I guess to M.I. on the odd occasion. But maybe not even that. I think it would probably cause me to lose taste, because while AU can be fun- its good when its just one of many delightful options, not when its the ONLY one though. I swear though, if the first thing I see is a Boo who hasn't aged my opinion will already have decreased rapidly and I will be tempted to get up and leave right there- because a Boo being the same age would automatically show they didn't even pay attention to the first movie enough on rewatching it (if they even do so). So why should I waste my time if they don't use any of theirs to make sure they get the most basic facts straight on their own movie?
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Apr 24, 2010 18:34:27 GMT -5
If Boo is the same age, or has barely aged, it wouldn't make sense at all, and it CERTAINLY would make so sense to have Mary Gibbs as her voice actress again-I mean, a 14-16 year-old teen voicing a toddler? That's why I'm skeptical about IMDb's claim that Mary Gibbs is returning, since as I explained, she really wasn't an actress, per se, when her voice was used as Boo's but was just being a normal toddler going about normal toddler business. While I wouldn't rule out Pixar having older teenage Boo as a character, that wouldn't have as much emotional appeal as a cute, helpless little kid character, would it? Also, I noticed that among the cast of the original, ONLY John Goodman, Billey Crystal and Mary Gibbs(who as I said, isn't even an actress that I'm aware of) are mentioned. No mention of Steve Buscemi, Frank Oz, Bob Peterson or Jennifer Tilly returning at all, so either Pixar is going to scrap the characters of Randall, Fungus, Roz and Celia Mae, or have them voiced by other people, or they just haven't been "officially" signed yet. Since Bob Peterson is a Pixar employee(and some say, a likely director of the sequel), it would not make sense to leave out his character, now would it? Until I see something official, from Disney or Pixar, or at least from what most could consider a reliable source like Jim Hill as to who has been cast, and who hasn't, I guess it's best to take all that info as rumor.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
Post by sgtyayap on Apr 24, 2010 18:43:49 GMT -5
Also, I noticed that among the cast of the original, ONLY John Goodman, Billey Crystal and Mary Gibbs(who as I said, isn't even an actress that I'm aware of) are mentioned. No mention of Steve Buscemi, Frank Oz, Bob Peterson or Jennifer Tilly returning at all, so either Pixar is going to scrap the characters of Randall, Fungus, Roz and Celia Mae, or have them voiced by other people, or they just haven't been "officially" signed yet. Since Bob Peterson is a Pixar employee(and some say, a likely director of the sequel), it would not make sense to leave out his character, now would it? Until I see something official, from Disney or Pixar, or at least from what most could consider a reliable source like Jim Hill as to who has been cast, and who hasn't, I guess it's best to take all that info as rumor. pitbulllady That further proves my point about the apparent unreliability of IMDB.
|
|
|
Post by RandallBoggs on Apr 24, 2010 19:08:46 GMT -5
Well no Mental, what I mean is it was the guy's last role so I figured it seemed more appropriate that they sorta honor that in some way.
Waternoose could be a background threat, afterall his trial may come up. May not be essential to the story but could still pop up uneededly like on the T.V. set or in the newspaper. -------------- If they keep with actual timeline, it might be a little difficult. I mean in all honesty I doubt Randall would survive over 10 years in our world if he's on his own. Of course in general, Ran wouldn't know what really happened to anybody. Though I would think that he'd think "Sullivan's Mr. Golden Boy...like he's EVER NOT going to have things go HIS way", so he might think Waternoose is in prision or something because things apparently go Sullivan's way. ------------------- That's a good point. It may be finalized, FOR NOW...but so was Newt when they announced it in a line-up a year or two ago. And who knows if Newt may pop up again or if M.I. will get pushed back because they need the time.
Hmm...DID Mary Gibbs grow up to be an actress?....Lets check Wikipedia! ^0^ ^0^ ------------- If Randall is ever claimed dead in this manner, then Wazowski and Sullivan will forever be labeled murderers. And good going Sgt with the Scream Arena bit. That itself is canon, so regardless, Ran's gonna be alive. ---------- *chuckles* Of course a bad thing is the fact that if it does suck in that instance, you've had already paid for a ticket to see it.
|
|
Bampot
Randall's Friend (800-1999)
<3
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by Bampot on Apr 24, 2010 19:31:09 GMT -5
Yes, IMDb is very very iffy in these early times. I assume that the main actors three are added as a given. While I believe most of the characters besides Sully and Mike are flexible for a sequel, I doubt they would leave out Celia.
Hmm, she'll probably be Celia Wazowski by now.
Ugh, the thought of the timeline being a less than a couple years is a bit painful to think about. I really want to see an older Boo if there's going to be a sequel.
The only thing that Mary did after MI was Mulan II, which I'm unfamiliar with. She was still only a tot then too.
|
|
|
Post by mistica0christina on Apr 24, 2010 21:31:21 GMT -5
Mary Gibbs...an actress?! Somehow, I think no, since MI, I haven't heard anything about any other movies she's been in so more than likely, she isn't an actress but if they did bring Boo back in this film, while it would be nice to see her casted again, I would think that decision would solely lie on her parents to decide. If they had to replace her, chances are Disney would use their "it" girl Selena Gomez since so many dumb preteens actually thinks she's younger than Cyrus (she isn't). As for the rest of the cast, if they aren't recasted for whatever strange reason, the answer could be as simple as the issue of money. It's that same issue why Catherine O'hara didn't reprise her role as Sally and Shock in Oogie's Revenge, it's like they say, money talks. Although, some voices would be hard to replace like Tilly's voice (love her as Tiffany, hate her as Celia), her voice would be very hard for another actress to copy.
|
|
randomdrifter
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Humility and Strength have never looked better.
Posts: 142
|
Post by randomdrifter on Apr 24, 2010 21:50:43 GMT -5
OK, I checked out the actors' pages. I'm not sure whether to be happy or not that Steve Buscemi's IMDb page has no mention at all of MI2, while those of the others do. I'm not sure just how much more valid IMDb is this early in the game than Wikipedia, since it HAS had errors before, and like Wikipedia, can be edited by anyone willing to charge the IMDb Pro account to a credit card. I don't know if Buscemi's casting just hasn't been finalized yet, or if he won't be returning, which of course means that Randall won't be returning, either, unless HE is voiced by another actor, and THAT I'd have problems with. Then again, if Randall does NOT return, that means that Pixar won't be dragging him through the mud again. pitbulllady Isn't it a little too early though for complete and full details about the movie? I noticed that with anything Pixar, we're almost always left speculating before more information is released for the film, including VA's. I mean, was I the only one that didn't know Reese Witherspoon would be cast as the lead up until a few days ago? Information is leaked little by little, and Pixar tends to moderate their advertising to the point of obscurity. I'm hoping and praying that they DO have Randall back, but will second PBL's choice to ditch it if it's just another vengeage flick. That's just boring, and upsetting because of lack of originality. But we'll see.
|
|