woody_buzz_dolls woody_buzz_dolls
Cartoon CulturePixar

Live Action “Toy Story”

19-year old Jonason Pauley and 21-year old Jesse Perrotta have made a live-action remake of Toy Story, shot-for-shot, using actual toys.

Why? Because they love it. Do you love it? Let us know in the comments below.

(Via The East Valley Tribune)

  • Billy Batz

    further proof that originality is gone

    • wever

      I don’t think originality was a goal in this project.

      • Obviously, still pretty neat.

        Rather see 24 2 minute shorts from these two tho’.

        But great exercise I’m sure… or part of some clever publicity stunt… Argh!!!! Damn you kids (and my cynicism)!

        • MP

          I’d rather watch snippets of this one video than see 48 min of whatever they can come up with.

    • trn

      ok, amid

  • wever

    You gotta admire their dedication and hard work just putting this all together! The credits show that they are far from the only people behind this- the vehicles, big props, and house spaces all had to be rented. However, you can tell they had no professional backing either. The post effects are amateurish, the actors’ deliveries are horrible (they’re obviously just friends they know from the neighborhood), and I don’t need to mention the simple puppetry, although that is something I like because of the exposed craft.

  • This post is quite a coincidence since I actually saw this yesterday on YouTube for the first time. I was surprised that it is literally a shot for shot remake. The techniques used to make the characters appear as if they are alive have obviously no effort to be hidden but since I am a fan of Toy Story I have to say I still liked it, maybe not the quality, but defiantly for the accuracy and effort of it.

  • Shazbot

    I loved this. I hope John Lasseter gets to see it. Pure joy!

    • wever

      I heard the 2 actually asked for Pixar’s permission.

  • I just think of how much they must have learned about storytelling studying the film so carefully. It was fun to watch, and amazing to see all the effort onscreen. I hope they get a tour of Pixar as a reward. I wonder how long it took to make?

  • I heard someone saying “Lasseter would love this, but disney would hate” and that is precisely my fears for this.

    The attention to detail is REALLY impressive !
    They even got the license plate on the car =D

  • Davetherave

    This is amazing! Looks like a ton of research and hard work went into this. If you’re giving any negative reviews, all I can say is you’re wrong – you simply can’t put down this amount of effort. Plus, they nailed it!

  • Britt

    I wonder if they’re going to re-create toy story 2.

    • wever

      “Don’t make promises we can’t keep.” :D

      • Kyle Maloney

        They did do a scene from toy story 3 already, so maybe their considering the other 2?

        • wever


          I wonder that, if they do 2, they’ll keep the same actor for Andy or replace him with someone 4 years older.

  • This is pretty cool! They even got the right dog.
    It’s not original in itself, but I bet those guys learned a lot in the process and might be able to move on to something original.

  • They really nailed it. I’m not sure if they needed to make the whole movie, but it’s their work, not mine and yeah, they may have learnt a lot in the process. It looks really accurate and even the backgrounds look pretty much the same, which shows that they were a little too realistic in the first place.

    Though they had to disguise a Barbie as Bo Peep. Poor Bo is the most underrated character in the saga, later being replaced in popularity by Jessie and completely absent in the third episode.

    • wever

      I’m sure a doll of Bo Peep was made at some point. But these days, I don’t see any.

  • Ikas

    Much better… than the sequels Hollywood churns out…

  • And to think all these years we’ve been doing it the hard way.

  • This only underlines the problem with the original movie – it was a story that could have been told just as well using any other animation technique. There was nothing special about the scenario that meant it could only be adequately portrayed using computer animation. In the end, apart from the interesting technical challenge of producing the first feature-length computer animation, the CG images provided nothing more than added glamour – something to attract an audience, and no more important to the story than added 3D would have been. Hollywood does this time and again – squandering the opportunities offered by new technologies, churning out the same old kind of movie instead of something completely different and innovative. But it’s always been this way. Early cinema pioneers in France and Germany used the new medium to produce something never seen before. Early Hollywood film makers (with notable exeptions which I’ve no doubt people will rush to point out) mainly churned out short movies which closely resembled a pre-existing form – popular theatre – in an effort to make a fast buck. From where I’m standing (an interested outsider) it doesn’t look like anything has changed since then.

    • In many ways I agree with you. When I first read the Toy Story script I thought it would work best as puppet animation, as George Pal’s tom thumb used stop motion toys to interact with real humans. And one of my favorite films is the Incredibles, which could be done in live action (even Elastigirl). I have often felt that a story should be animated films if it couldn’t be made any other way. But computer technology has blurred the lines between animation and live so choosing animation is merely an artistic design choice, like choosing to use an illustration instead of a photograph.

      And as you suspected there were many early American artists who did work that made excellent use of the medium, like Winsor McCay, and Max Fleischer.

      • wever

        “We’re dealing with a story that COULD OF COURSE be done in live-action! But it can’t be told THIS WAY.” -Brad Bird

      • But where are the McCays and Fleischers of today? I’m sure there are a few candidates in the US who are innovative, imaginative and creative, but are any of them working in the mass market, or getting general releases outside the “arthouse” ghetto? The Fleischers were mainstream and popular in their time, but these days, even a moderately individual voice like Tim Burton is considered a risky investment, and wild cards like Kricfalusi, though respected, have to work in the margins. The fact remains that the world’s first feature-length CG animation, a tremendous technical advance, was a story that could have been told in other ways. Meanwhile, innovate stuff from Europe like “Kooky” (from what I’ve seen, and like most people I’ve only seen the trailer), remain unreleased.

        This dulling of the mass market has even infected Youtube. Jonathan Pauley and Jason Perotta could have chosen to do something original. Instead they chose to take all that time and effort creating a shot-for-shot live action version of movie that already existed. Did they lack imagination? I doubt it, they’re obviously quite creative. Did they really, really like the original movie? Well, a “tribute” is all well and good, but a little futile. Or did they think they’d get more hits on Youtube if they did something that was familiar to a mass audience, but with an added gimmick? You know, like Hollywood does? If that was the case (I’m not saying it was, I wouldn’t like to be so rude), then who could blame them, or others like them? They’re working in an environment that rewards mediocrity.

        • Dup

          The fact that they recreated a feature film does raise the question of whether this was really worth their it. This is debatable. To say that it shows Toy Story could have been done this way, at least to me, is a bit less. Part of it’s charm is really it’s expert-amateurishness. Like the wires and the obvious stop motion and other things let you know this is really a homage and not trying to be a replacement or even a mediocre or just bad replacement(like those poor Disney rip offs). Toy Story could never have been originally done this way and been a success. How much of the success of this is that we are bringing our memories of the fully animated performance of the characters to this and we see the bobbing Woody with a very very limited performance and say, “That’s the Toy Story I remember!”? I just watched a section of it but I really couldn’t recommend watching any of it if you have never saw the original. You wouldn’t get that chilling feeling of “This is laughably nothing like the actual film…and yet it is! It’s all there!” I don’t know if it’s confirmed but Disney seems to be okay with this, and I think that’s really because no one thinks anyone from a future generation is going to ever have watched this and later say, “There was an original before Live Action Toy Story?”

          • Bill “Danger” Robinson

            This is that internet thing people do where they go on for too long taking the piss out of someone else’s work for no real reason.

        • Ive said it before. I’ll say it again. KOOKY IS ON ITUNES. See it. It’s awesome

  • WOW! That was a labor of love, but who is going to watch the entire thing? If I were their friend I would have advised them to lovingly recreate a sequence to perfection-instead of the entire picture!

  • I like that the kid tries to imitate the creepy, marionette-on-ritalin-style movement that Andy has in the movie.

  • Chris

    Where did they find a Sinclair gas station? I thought they were out of business.

    • There are lots of them in the Midwest/Plains areas (we saw them in Nebraska)

  • Dave

    I’m impressed. A great tribute. I proves that if the story is good you will watch it.