CGIFeature FilmPixar Trailer: “Monsters University” By Amid Amidi | 06/20/2012 7:44 am | 82 Share Tweet Email Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window) Email 82 The trailer for Pixar’s Monsters University directed by Dan Scanlon. Pixar cut three additional versions of the trailer that can be seen on iTunes, Yahoo Movies and HuffPost. We welcome thoughtful comments on articles, but please read our community guidelines before participating. All comments are moderated and will not immediately appear on the site; your patience is appreciated. Thad Wow, a truly ‘stylized’ Pixar movie. A film about college, and no sex, alcohol, porn, crude penis drawings, or pot in sight. And people say CGI is all about ‘realism’! Christina Skyles Monsters University is probably the monster world equivalent of BYU. tredlow Is it just me, or does the… graphics look bad. I don’t know if “graphics” is the right word, but the rendering looks unfinished. I don’t know what the technical term is. Maybe because it’s still an early version. amid Something to keep in mind: lighting is rarely final in CG animation trailers. Courtney Either Amid’s right or they’re going for a pre-Monster’s Inc look. anonymous i agree some of the characters look a little plastic like, I dunno. Looks fun enough though. Funkybat I learned to not judge the quality of Pixar films on their trailers when I saw Cars. The early Cars trailer looked really bad and “plasticky,” the final film was beautiful, if flawed in other ways. The trailer for The Incredibles was pretty all-around amazing, though. As for MU, The animation was solid, and it looks like a fun scenario. I’m not worried. wever People said that about the last Monsters film when they saw that trailer. I remember a post on here that called it “unfinished rendering that looks like a student film”, and the film came out fantastic! Same deal here. Andrea Pixar is trying to get the same look they had with Monsters Inc. Super bright colours and all. I’m pretty sure it’s deliberate. JM WALTER Nevermind about the lame Lighting itÂ´s the story and humour IÂ´m worried about. P I X A R never used to rely on pop culture driven jokes, or popular songs like DreamWorks used to. Spandau Ballet at the end?? really??, not a bad song ,and itÂ´s purely recognizable within the memorabilia of an American 30 something year old…but what about the rest of the world?. Besides…using the same actors to provide the young voices, I donÂ´t think itÂ´s a good idea, John Goodman has always sounded to me like SantaClaus, can he sell a College student Sulley just because they made his hair spiky?. IÂ´m dissapointed on so man levels, and IÂ´m usually thrilled about P I X A RÂ´s upcoming releases, letÂ´s see how they fix this. Markham The joke doesn’t rely on that specific song, though. Put any “slow dance” song in and it’s still basically the same joke. Deaniac Is it me or does the lighting in the hallway scene seem a bit…off? Nitpick aside, I’m looking foward to this. J Gotta say, it’s a really weird choice to make a Monsters Inc prequel. At the end of the first film everyone learnt that scaring was bad, positive laughter was good. Now they’re back to scaring? It leads me to believe that the film has very little to do with the mechanics of scaring and is more interested in the relationship between Mike and Sully, perhaps some love interest/conflict or something. The inevitable question is, why use these characters in this world, when their/its point in existing was as a counterpoint to the human world. I guess we’ll find out! Just seems super weird. Roberto I’m kinda happy they went with this prequel thing instead of a sequel precisely cause the ending of the first one is so perfect. I don’t want to see Boo all grown up. In fact the first movie did really good by not showing her at the end cause she could have probably be a little more grown up after all that time and they prefer the audience to remember her as she was. It was subtle. Anyway I’m not totally sold on the concept of this one although I’ve ever thought there were more things to explore about these characters and these world…but the first one was just so perfect that this seems kinda unnecessary. Probably they should have just done more shorts about Sulley and Mike, like Mike’s New Car. Or maybe a movie about some other monster in Monstropolis with these guys playing a secondary role. This looks entertaining enough…but there are way too many sequels at Pixar at this point. Leo Pixar’s lineup for the next 4 or 5 years: Brave – Not a sequel. Monsters university – Sequel (well, prequel) The Good Dinosaur – Not a sequel Unnamed Pete Docter movie – Not a sequel unnamed Lee Unkrich movie – Not a sequel Too many sequels? Where? ;-) Mesterius Come next year, Pixar will have released 3 sequels in rapid succession (all of them within 2010-2013). I certainly think this is a bit too much… especially considering Pixar’s track record for all-original concepts during the last decade. I hope they go back to that after Monsters University… and that they stay there. James Mercifully, the sequels/prequels look to be coming to an end after this movie. droosan Would you rather that these recent-and-forthcoming sequels had been made at Circle-7 Studios, or at Pixar..? Because, IIRC, those were the choices. These three movies were -gonna- get made, at one place or the other. Think of them as extensions of the original Disney-Pixar contract agreement, if it helps (they’re -not-, of course .. I’m just sayin’, -THINK- of ’em that way, if rage gets the better of ya) ^_^ Personally, I enjoyed TOY STORY 3 and CARS 2 for what they were (a satisfying completion of a trilogy for the former, and an inoccuous ‘spy spoof’ in the latter) .. and IMO this tiny peek at the MONSTERS INC prequel looks fun, so far. Roberto I enjoyed Toy Story 3 and Cars 2 too, even though I find the first one hugely overrated and the second one was probably the only Pixar movie that was kind of dispensable, even though it was entertaining enough and I didn’t want my money back after watching it. But maybe if they really want to reuse characters they should make some movies thinking about it from the very start. Creating situations and characters that would serve for different “episodes” like Bugs Bunny, Wallace and Gromit or Indiana Jones. With Toy Story the sequels feel natural, even though not too risky considering the third one was basically a repetition of the subjects in the first and second ones.It was supossed to include this subject about time passing by, but that was hardly explored, the stakes were higher but the ending is equally happy and most of the movie is a spoof of heist movies, which is very funny in its own way, but it’s basically the clasical villain vs heroes set up. With Monsters, Mike and Sully’s characters and universe does look like something that could work in different stories…but when you add Boo to the equation, her story was completely closed and difficult to match, and that’s surely why they picked a prequel. Still, would Mike and Sully young years be as interesting as their present? That’s what I’m not so sure of. If they had managed to write a sequel without showing Boo, but at the same time implying that they still visit her frequently maybe that would have been a more intriguing option. But really, I can’t tell it before watching the movie. It’s just that while I think the teaser is ok and fun enough, I don’t feel so excited to see the characters again…and it’s odd cause these are my favourite characters in any Pixar movie. I think it’s because in some ways the first movie told me almost everything I needed to know, even if I would really like to see more gags and funny dialogues with them, I’m not extremely interested in more “stories” about them. Maybe “Monsters Toons” would have been a better option than “Cars Toons” or “Toy Story Toons” (and I think most of the shorts are good anyway). Funkybat There was no way Boo could/should have been included in any “Monsters” sequels, unless it was some tiny cameo, along the lines of Sid working the garbage truck in Toy Story 3. The Monsters & Boo story arc was beautiful and should remain closed. I’m glad to see this is apparently the end of the line for Pixar sequels for a while, and I’m glad that “Monsters” is the one getting a follow-up. “Monsters Inc.” and “The Incredibles” are the only Pixar movies I feel are worth revisiting with additional films. Unfortunately, it seems Brad Bird isn’t interested in doing any more “Incredibles” films, so I kind of hope no one else tries to pick up the torch on that one. I’m looking forward to “Monsters University” and to the multiple new stories coming in the years after it. wever If the story artists are as good as they have been since 1995, they would incorporate some kind of interaction with the human world. The entire concept of this monster world cannot exist without it, that was the entire point of the premise. I’m all for having a story centered more on the friendship of Mike and Sully, but with that human element, this film will feel distant to the audience. Nick Bruel Looks like fun, but I do have a couple of concerns… Since this looks to be a prequel, it looks as if there will be no Boo. Boo was, of course, the heart of “Monsters, Inc.” The final moment of that movie still chokes me up. So I’m concerned that without Boo, this follow up film will lack the emotional resonance that made the first one so darn good. My second concern is the topic. Monster college is a neat idea, but I tend to wonder how much kids will really respond to the concept. All of the standard cliches about college like hazing and parties and sports that this film will likely parody will be fun to watch, but will not have any place of reference for your average child. It could be that Pixar isn’t targeting kids with this movie, and that would be a shame because like it or not they will be roughly half of this film’s audience. Having said all that, I’ve really come to trust Pixar in its storytelling, and I probably shouldn’t be drawing any conclusions from this trailer alone. Tyler K. Pixar doesn’t write for kids, they construct stories that examine universal themes of the human condition and structure them in a non-threatening environment (except maybe Cars 2, that seemed mostly just for kids). Still, it’s possible to imagine College in ways that’ll work for younger audience members, just like The Incredibles made a spy film that toned down the sex and violence without losing it completely. wever Sure this film won’t be aimed at kids solely. Disney has a Facebook group for this film, which means they intend to target the college, internet-savvy audience as well. tedzey Maybe this movie will pull a shamalayan twist and have it be a sequel instead… wishful thinking aside, it looks funny. Not as funny as the teaser to the first movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vngk9Wp9bGk feep Yep, the first teaser had pure character, and humor from the character. This however.. concerns me. It still seems so random to do a prequel to this film out of their entire roster. I guess the wave of kids that saw this in their youth ARE in college now, but it is still odd to do a prequel eleven years after the original. Funkybat From what I understand, this film is supposed to be “When Mikey Met Sully” (so to speak), but in the trailer above, Sully makes references to Mike passing notes to a classmate in 5th grade. Of course, how would he know about that if they first met in college? It’s probably uber-uber-nerdy of me to hope for continuity with a teaser trailer from 12 years ago, but I would be remiss in my geekitude not to at least mention it. Chris Powell hahahah its funny I remember the same thing…..the honest truth: they didnt know they were making a college themed prequel 12 year ago :) Bobby Nice but I am tired of media’s portrayal of college as some kind of time/place to piss away your time. It started with Animal House and still continues to this day, any coincidence that America is getting less competitive with the global economy? I think it’s because kids are brought up thinking that they can goto college to party while accruing severe crippling debt and expect to be rewarded a decent job after graduation through the mere fact that they have a piece of paper that suggests they deserve a better paying job. I already know that this comment will generate harsh responses from many, but I would rather our colleges be a place of learning and serious self-development than what it’s become today.. a total 180 from why higher education exists in the first place. Gobo It is entirely possible to work very, very hard in college AND have a room party with your friends. Given that Mike apparently fell asleep while studying, I think we’ll likely see that. I also think you’re reading way too much into a tiny teaser. DarylT No, no it’s not. Steve Gattuso Gobo, you must have been a Business major, because my experiences at university were that anything actually requiring serious brainpower ate into your free time like a fat man burns through a buffet table. Yo Amen man.. Hank Yet another remnant of the”reagun revolution.”. The expectation of something for nothing. Scarabim Uh, you must be thinking of the “Great Society” entitlements generation, which began around the Lyndon Johnson administration. Hank No, I meant reagun…where the “me” generation of entitlement for the wealthy and corporations without work festered. AaronSch You should have learned to spell rather than listening to the leftist propaganda fed to you by university professors (you know, that academic bunch earning six figure incomes and tenure without having to prove competence in what they are supposed to be teaching). If you had, perhaps you would have learned that the 40th and greatest president of the 20th century was named Ronald Wilson Reaganâ€”not “Reagun.” I worked my ass off, bought my first home and paid for my own college education in the 1980s. I’ve done very well financially and paid more than my fair share of taxes to the city, state and federal government in the process. I sacrificed and earned every last dime they allowed me to put in my wallet. I don’t owe anyone anything for taking my education and responsibility to work seriously. A man named Steve Jobs recently passed away. You may have heard of him, he was the genius who co-founded Apple Computers and pioneered a series of revolutionary technologies including the iPhone and iPad. In 1986 he gambled and purchased a little company called, The Graphics Group which would later be renamed Pixar. What numbskulls call “greed” and “me generation” was actually “drive” and “ambition.” Thank God these personal attributes still existâ€”for the time beingâ€” because who knows if any of these terrific technologic breakthroughs would have been created had limits been placed on what Steve Jobs and others like him could personally achieve for the betterment of all. In my experience, most of the people who have wealth worked hard for it and have talents that contributed more to society than the sum total of all the whiny socialist, anarchist slackers in the so-called “occupy movement.” Society doesn’t owe you crap simply because you were born. Once you realize that fact, you’ll make something of your life and be a producer rather than a parasite. To my knowledge, no corporation has plundered my wealth and income more than the government. The sooner we confront the imbeciles who believe in the ideology of “redistribution of wealth,” the sooner we will begin to heal economically. For those willing to work hard and take the financial risks necessary for success should come the greater rewards. ’nuff said Mike Cool story bro. But I think you’re on the wrong website. Hank Remember–reagun illegally sold arms to terrorists to fund an illegal terrorist war. Â And the fact is, unleashing corporations to plunder individual rights was NOT a good thing.. The regun “me, me me!” generation led directly to the bush economic debacle. Corporations are not people. And stock traders are not “small business owners.” mick I am pretty sure anarchy and socialism are different things… and I didn’t even go to college tredlow Well, fighting Nazis in ancient tombs look more fun than actual archeology. dbenson “Animal House” turned a satiric spotlight on a specific era, and essentially replaced an old template with a new one. But the fantasy of a 4-year coed summer camp before adulthood goes back to the 1920s (Keaton, Lloyd, Clara Bow and many more), and even before that (the idle rich students in “Charley’s Aunt” never study). It’s up there with sitcom workplaces given mainly to bon mots and interoffice romance (the original “Monsters Inc” made the scream factory an idealized high school) and fairy tale kingdoms where the one and only problem is an anti-social witch or a geezer hot for the princess. Yes, they’re patently unreal. That’s why we like them. That said, “Monsters University” has some potential. They may just stick with the joke of frat boys as literal monsters, but there’s also something in seeing how they come to embrace scaring little kids as a noble calling. E. Nygma Well, If all the characters were just studying to get good grades, who would want to see that film? Joel SomeIntern forgot to turn on the GI in the rendering :) Jonah Sidhom Doesn’t Global Illumination take forever to render? Maybe they couldn’t do it in time for the trailer release. Red Pill Junkie You had me at ‘Wazowsky’ :) J That’s “Wazowski” with one eye! mick Chug chug, high five, woooooo etc… oh no I agree with the poor lighting comments. Surely it is due to the film being as yet unfinished Charles Kenny Oooh, er, that doesn’t seem very convincing at all, and not just because the lighting or whatever is off. College and dorm pranks are fine in one sense, but in a kids movie?! They must be aiming for the original’s audience with this one. tredlow They did with Toy Story, so who knows? Jesse Hughes I agree with Charles, above me. School? Music? Dancing? IN A KIDS’ MOVIE?!? Totally inappropriate. We’d ruin our youth. James This looks more squarely aimed at kids, but I’ll probably be moderately entertained. The college setting just does not interest me in the slightest. The mountain of possible boring cliches and retreads keeps me from caring in the slightest. Hopefully it’s better than the premise suggests. Lastly, now that this prequel has introduced to classroom setting with the characters “learning” how to be monsters, doesn’t this feel like a more direct knock-off on the old “Ahhh! Real Monsters!” cartoon than the original film? allari Now that was a very funny nickelodeon cartoon! Red Pill Junkie I don’t understand all the comments discussing whether college is an appropriate theme for a kids’ movie. May I remind you Monsters Inc. was released in 2001? So it’s a safe bet many of the ‘kids’ who grew up watching that movie are on their way to college themselves as we speak â€”um, write. When is it carved in stone that EVERYTHING that comes out of Pixar must *always* be intended for the youngest audience ’til the end of times? TheDoctorJones woah. this’ll be three straight Pixar movies I don’t have much interest in. am i getting older or has Pixar finally lost the magic? Jenovasilver That’s pretty much me, you’ll have to supply alcohol and a ticket for me to go see Brave. Joel Before watching this, I was really afraid I wasn’t gonna like this, but it seems fun. I’ll definitely check it out next year! Vixie This trailer made me laugh, of all the movies to do a sequel to, Monsters is at the top of my list from Pixar. I just think Mike and Sully have enough potential to easily carry another movie. Two great characters, and I am looking forward to seeing this one. Pedro Nakama If Pixar makes a film about college life they only thing they have to reference is animators going to Cal Arts. So If the Monsters have a Halloween party one of them will spike the punch bowl with acid. wever There’s gonna be a classroom with A113 on the door. Calling it now. Chris Sobieniak Of course I wouldn’t mind if it was a real spike just to joke with us a little. Alissa Eh, not too enthusiastic about the premise. Watching monsters scare children and giving an explanation as to why was cool. It took an old concept and placed it in a workable setting. School is school no matter how many monsters you stick in it. And of course, the perennial prequel problem. Why should I bother watching this movie when I know what will happen? Now of course it’s about the journey not the destination but if I already know the destination that puts more responsibility on the journey to entertain. Or something. Bob Hilgenberg >”Nice but I am tired of media’s portrayal of college as some kind of time/place to piss away your time. It started with Animal House”< Um, so Ivan Reitman is the "media"? Kinda blurring the lines, there. As for the trailer, I'm hopeful. After eleven years, this will be a true test of the power of Pixar and sequels in general. I do love me some Mike & Sully:) Ugh Seems like a real step back for Pixar… again. I mean at least visually these guys have perfected their skills beyond the simplistic designs of the characters. Visually it looks like a real step. Storywise? …..Eh…. Can’t say I ever really cared about how Mike & Sully became friends in college. But I’d love for Pixar to prove me wrong. 5 years ago I would’ve never wanted to see a film about a rat in a French kitchen & that was magic E. Nygma Since the first Monster Inc. film was so good, I think I will dig this. I don’t mind Pixar doing a sequel as long as the first film was good…unlike Cars IMO. The problem is they most likely won’t stop with this one. Everything is always at least a trilogy these days. I loved Toy Story 3 but please no more…even if it is a good idea. This film should have a cool “Art Of” book though. I have the first one and all the concepts of monsters are great! Hopefully this will have many more funny monsters! JosephSchmoe Pixar has his a home run every time, including a few grand slams. OK, so Cars2 was an inside-the-park HR, but still….. Still waiting for you people who make your yearly, “This looks awful, I know it will bomb!” predictions to be right. It won’t happen this time, either. Funkybat I’d say “Cars 2” was more of a bunt that forced home a runner because the bases were loaded. Ryan G I found something very strange…in the Youtube trailer, when Mike is sleeping, he says: “My pony made the Dean’s list.” But in the trailer on the Apple website (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/disney/monstersuniversity/), he says: “I can’t go to class, I’m not wearing any clothes.” What’s up with that? So that’s two different lines in the same trailer on different websites?! Ryan G I found out that there are actually four different lines in trailers on four different websites: http://whatstrending.com/2012/06/pixars-monsters-university-trailers-social-video/ wever The two other’s are “My homework ate my dog,” and “class president?? Hee hee hee…” Funkybat How odd… The “homework ate my dog” line is kind of clever, the “pony” one doesn’t make much sense, even as a throwaway gag. I must have watched the “pony” trailer 10 times and couldn’t figure out what he was saying until seeing the post above, I just knew it had something to do with a pony, and wondered it maybe it was some kind of MLP:FIM reference. Also, does anyone know if the disco song is a real one from the 70s, or just something Pixar made up for the trailer? Toonio Finally animation that is fun to watch without the preachy message all over the place. Count me in. A Writer This look hilarious. I can’t wait for Pete Doctor’s new film. David This reminds me of Madagascar 3 which I loved! Great to see Pixar emulating Dreamworks. Sarah J I won’t criticize the animation. It’s not the uber-high quality we usually see from Pixar, but this is just an early trailer so there’s probably a lot more they’re gonna do. The trailer itself doesn’t make the movie seem particularly interesting yet. But I’ve sort of learned to give Pixar the benefit of a doubt. They’ve picked up these really dopey premises, stories that sound stupid, and turned them into amazing and heartfelt movies. Even if Pixar released a trailer for an upcoming film that was literally about a puddle of dog vomit, I’d still say “I’ll wait and see before making a judgement”. Tak Disappointing. Clearly, attention is over at the Disney Studios. Maybe that’s a good thing. Tak The younger Sully & Mike designs really don’t work like the old ones did from the original film. I thought this when I saw the comparison for Monsters U at the screening Seriously. http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqb08jutTO1qz7q8fo1_500.jpg Nathan Strum I saw it before Brave last night (midnight showing). The audience there loved it. As for me – I’ve long since learned not to judge Pixar films based on their initial teaser trailers (which is what this is – with probably zero footage from the actual film). They’ve never really been able to capture the feel or quality of the what the final films end up becoming in their teasers. Funkybat The one that completely captured the spirit of the film was the teaser for “The Incredibles.” That trailer was probably one of the best movie trailers I’ve ever seen, it totally tells you everything you need to know without giving away any of the actual film. Blasko Is there really enough material here for a prequel? Hmm. This seems like something the Disney direct to video team would have done in the late 90’s. jLo The Incredibles 2 please :( Samjoe Please,I’m just disappointed. A “Prequel” is just another money grab, a “Sequel” but with a more artsy angle. If it is good more power to them. If it is bad, heaven help them. Want an example? Iron Giant 2 “The road back” A story that needs to told, or a moneygrab? Previous PostCharles Thorson's "Captain and The Kids" model sheets Next PostDisney Redesigns The Seven Dwarfs For "7D"