Talk:Toy Story 3/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Distribution

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

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

Irreverent testament

Can someone find a way to rephrase this?

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

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

Tom Hanks

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

I don't know...Can someone who knows please let us know? 4.158.210.233 01:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Could you also answer the same question for Tim Allen with Buzz!? — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 21:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Most likely they will. It's the case with John Ratzenberger, who will be sure to voice Hamm now that Pixar is involved. I think that Hanks and Allen will return for Woody and Buzz, and I believe that Jim Cummings will voice Slinky Dog (speculation). Jienum

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

Under new management

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

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

I wish Toy Story 3 comes soon!

Image removal

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the image as the idea of a buzz lightyear recall has been officially scrapped by both Disney and Pixar making the outdated picture irrelevent.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

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

Release?

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

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

Patrick Warburton

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

starring

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

I wonder

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

W A L E

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

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

Previous Plot

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

Err...what?

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

ROFL 24.126.40.49 (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

lmao -- Frightwolf (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

To the Theatres!

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

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

August 6, 2008?

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

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

are we sure?

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

I interpret that as "We're currently running on a schedule with a release date in 2009, but it's not set in stone and we might change it". Remember, Cars was scheduled to be released in November 2005 for a long time. Until we hear information which contradicts it, 2009 should be alright. RMS Oceanic 21:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Something additional you could do is state both in the lead paragraph and the Infobox Film template is to mention "tentative". For example, "2009 (tenative)" in the template, and "Toy Story 3 has a tentative release date for 2009." That would illustrate the information we have accurately. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 21:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, great! Junk!

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

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

Searching for 74.38.12.109!

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

The user only made one edit, according to his contribution history, so he/she was probably a passing visitor. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 00:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

But he/she vandalised the article! ;-( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.210.200.212 (talk) 15:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

What'd heshe do? Post it, word for word. PS: Hi, I admit I did this crime. :rolleyes: How do we do smilies here?

He/she put the words "U SUCK" in big letters right in the middle of the article. A•N•N•A hi! 02:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Gah! Someone added six informal letters. HELP! WE'RE AFRAID OF IT!

Other plot?

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

Well, unless you can provide solid evidence, we can't mention anything about that on the page. Rusty5 01:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Plus, Andy already has Molly. jj 02:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

(Sarcasm:) So you mean, becuase of my little brother, it's impossible to get a step?

(No sarcasm) No, he means that Andy's toys already deal with girl toys since he has a little sister, so that plot is unnecessary and redundant. --ScreaminEagle 20:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler tag?

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

Nah. A•N•N•Afoxlover hello! 20:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Pixar creates all films inhouse. jj 21:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be nice if you would care to explain why you don't think a spoiler tag should be in place.

I'm not sure what that has to do with what I was saying. The child care centre plot came directly from John Lasseter/Pixar themselves. The idea was talked about during a DVD commentary- that's how we know about it. --58.179.224.128 08:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

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

The DVD commentary on the Ultimate Toy Box DVD set. I'm guessing they mention it on the commentary for Toy Story, or Toy Story 2. --211.26.60.151 00:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Please give the section name and timestamp of the comment. Otherwise, we have to treat this as completely unverifable.SpikeJones 03:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Characters not appearing

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

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

I heard in Jim Varney's Autobiography on Wikipedia.Com that Slinky Dog in Toy Story 3 will be replaced by Lou Romano.

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

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

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

Maybe they won't cut Lenny's role, after all other than "Right here Woody!" he's said nothing 68.109.165.199 (talk) 02:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry If My Comment Sounded Like A Forum Post 68.109.165.199 (talk) 02:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Toy Story 3: Prospector's Revenge

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

Final installment

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

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

Speculation?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair use rationale for Image:TS3 logo 4.JPG

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

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

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

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

Joe Ranft

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

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

New plot?

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

Release section

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

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

well, this is a bit inconvinent...

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

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

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

Stage of Production

can someone do some snooping and figure out what stage of production they are in?? that seems like it would be a nice touch hornplayer2 (talk) 04:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The Hollywood Reporter's production listings state it is in production (meaning it's being animated). Hence why this article exists and has not been merged. Alientraveller (talk) 10:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What happened to the Story section?

I distincly remember the TS3 page here having a section containing both Circle 7's and Pixar's story ideas. Pixar's has since disapeared. What happened? Wup (talk) 02:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You mean the premise section that was so short it's in the lead now? Alientraveller (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Who are the replacements for slinky and penguin because the director said his friends would play them but who are they —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megaplex (talk • contribs) 17:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

ComingSoon.net cite

The ComingSoon.net link that is the reference point for the majority of the cast listed in this article might not be entirely accurate. As much as I would like to see Bo Peep return in the film, I have seen no indication anywhere that Annie Potts will be returning to voice her. The ComingSoon.net article does not mention her name (nor the names of many of the other actors listed, though their appearances have been confirmed elsewhere). Here's to hoping something/someone confirms Bo Peep/Anne Potts soon... dogman15 (talk) 08:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Bo Peep will not be returning in the third film. A group of friends and I had tickets to an advanced screening of the movie and she was mentioned, but did not appear. I was surprised about how officials in the theatre didn't debrief us afterward on what we were allowed to share about the film, but then again that was the first screening I had ever been to. Palmtree73 (talk) 08:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Logo vs. Teaser Poster

I don't really see what the fuss is all about. Disney was obviously fine with its teaser poster not having the "Toy Story" in it. People know what it is, especially with the font, and nobody's gonna expect to call it "3." There's also the picture in the "Development" section with the logo on it, so I doubt people will be confused. Not to mention that there's a tagline and release date on the teaser poster. Enter Movie (talk) 04:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

That, and the words "Toy Story 3" appear 13 times in the article (including its title). Like I said in my edit summary, if there's more promotional material out for this movie than a simple logo, we should be illustrating it in the article. As Enter Movie said, the standalone logo will still appear in the article anyways. Digitelle (talk) 13:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Blake Clark is Slinky Dog

Lasseter announced it on his twitter that Blake Clark is replacing the late Jim Varney. 24.87.40.201 (talk) 02:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I went to the RSS feed and extracted the single post. I saw the video on Facebook too. --Addict 2006 03:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Plot error

In the plot it says that the toys are thrown away and picked up by the garbage man. This is only partially right. They are accidently thrown away, but they manage to escape before the garbagemen get around to them. The toys hide in Andy's mom's van to avoid being seen. Woody tries to convince the other toys that it was an accident and that they weren't meant to be thrown away. While Woody struggles with the other toys, Andy's mom gets in the van and drives to a local daycare to donate some old toys. All the toys hide in the box that's meant to be donated. Obviously, I don't have a source so you'll just have to take my word on it. I saw an advanced screening about a month ago. (Palmtree73 (talk) 20:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC))

there's loads of ppl claiming they saw the movie already. but your plot does make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocknroll47 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Though not all claims are true, a lot of people HAVE seen it already--advanced screening. (Palmtree73 (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC))

The first half of the scene was released to the public. 3rd party article, clip via Facebook, clip on TS3 website. --Addict 2006 07:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

toy story 3

one day in the toy story 3 new house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.203.49.242 (talk) 18:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Kids rap promo for Toy Story 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX4LIPF7LRs A must see!

$200 Million?

The budget says "$200 Million" for Toy Story 3. I had not heard anything about the budget since it was announced, so I would like to ask about the source. Thank you, Joshua H-Star-R 17:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua H-Star-R (talk • contribs)

New trailer from Japan

Someone claimed that the minor characters appeared in this trailer. But other than that, there is newly-revealed footage from the film. I want someone from the veterans to take a look and decide what to do, albeit mentioning the new trailer, incorporate elements from the trailer to the plot summary, or otherwise.

The article is http://pixarplanet.com/blog/japanese-toy-story-3-trailer-reveals-fresh-footage .

--Addict 2006 02:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Andy's mom's name.

Someone had written the name of Andy's mom (voiced by Laurie Metcalf, as we all know) as "Jennifer 'Jenny' Davis". They then cited this Lee Unkrich Twitter comment: http://twitter.com/leeunkrich/statuses/4820087123 . If one goes there, he links to a video of him announcing things about Toy Story 3. He said that Laurie Metcalf was coming back to do her voice but not what Mrs. Davis' first name was. Thus, I removed "Jennifer 'Jenny'" and replaced it with "Mrs." For all we know, Andy's mom may be Emily, Jessie's previous owner, from Toy Story 2. -dogman15 (talk) 06:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

The owner is Andy's mom, but it isnt referenced anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.182.227 (talk) 17:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Considering that Jessie has seen Andy's mom on a few occasions, I think Jessie would known if she was Emily soon after she arrived at Andy's House. Besides that, Woody would have told Jessie if Andy's mom had the name of Emily, when he met her in Toy Story 2 and asked her (and Bullseye) to come live with him. I really think Woody knows the first name of Andy's mom. He probably has heard it spoken on more than a few occasions.204.80.61.110 (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Bennett Turk

Suggestion for block

I suggest that unregistered users be blocked from editing the Toy Story 3 article. There has been a lot of edits lately adding erroneous cast information and people have been copying the entire full plot summary directly from the Pixar Wiki. dogman15 (talk) 03:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I definately agree with that also they are lacking sources (such as Chuckles The Clown and others) trainfan01 (talk) 19:07, May 2 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 02:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC).

Well, that's part of the problem. There is a character named Chuckles (the Clown), but at the same time characters like Wheezy and Bo Peep do not speak. We're getting mixed edits from honest people like me, thrown in with the fallacies of internet rumors from the anonymous IPs. I think it would just be better to lock the page down and let only registered users edit. dogman15 (talk) 06:30, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I have had to remove actors of Charlie Adler, Cheech Marin, Frank Welker, Lou Romano, Sam Gold, Carroll Spinney (who was expecting a muppeteer?)and Patrick Warburton. There is no way these actors would be casting in this film. trainfan01 20:23 3 May 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 03:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC).

Someone changed the voice of Chuckles from James Anthony Cotton to Bud Lucky without providing a reliable source (I have changed it back) and also there has been an inserting of Jack Willis as Frog (What is this. A toy frog?) and Charlie Bright, Amber Kroner and Brianna Maiwood as Peas-In-A-Pod as well. Both of these once again has no sources either. If no one can find an source for any of these actors these both will be deleted. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC).

Disney has actually issued a press release with all of the confirmed actors and more. I don't have direct access to it, but you can read more here and actually see the press release if you have a password here. That, and Pixar has sent IMDb their official cast/crew list, so that Toy Story 3's IMDb page cast list isn't garbage anymore. dogman15 (talk) 07:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

That says it. I have removed the citation needed tags. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC).

College Cliffhanger Screenings

Why hasn't something been said about the college cliffhanger screenings? According to this, such special screenings deserve mention. Here's a source (The New York Times): http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/movies/01pixar.html Do you think this is worth adding to the article? dogman15 (talk) 06:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

• NYT is a perfectly acceptable source, and I think that it would fit well in the Marketing section of the article. I'd add it, but I really shouldn't even be editing Wikipedia at all right now (I missed the college cliffhanger screening in my area today because I'm supposed to be busy). J0lt C0la (talk) 06:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Because marketing screenings are not notable. They happen regularly - these just happen to be targeted to college kids instead of via traditional audience methods. SpikeJones (talk) 22:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Animation - Low importance?

This is Toy Story 3! Pixar's 11th feature film and one of the biggest films of Summer 2010! I'd say it's at least at Mid importance, if not High. dogman15 (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

No budget, no gross revenue, upcoming film. If it become one of the highest grossing film of 2010 (high probability) it can be re-assessed. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 19:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no doubts that it will reach a higher importance, like other major studios' animated films. dogman15 (talk) 20:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Why is it still low importance under animation in general? dogman15 (talk) 00:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Non-speaking and length of film

Someone has removed Peas-In-A-Pod from the non-speaking characters section even though no voice actor has been confirmed. I re-inserted it back into this section yesterday only to discover this morning that it has been removed again. Thus I have re-inserted it again. Whatever is going on here should be stopped now. Unless a voice actor is confirmed they are to stay in this section for now. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:58, 14 May 2010 (UTC).

Additionally I do not see any source at all to confirm the film's length will be 86 minutes (1 hour and 26 minutes) long at all because every time a film is released it's sequel always tends to be longer than it's prodecessor for whatever reason (Toy Story is 81 minutes long and Toy Story 2 is 92 minutes long). So I think this should be removed from the template until further info is given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I was right. The running time is of course 102 minutes as proven in the source below. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully....

Hopefully, this will be the last Toy Story film on Pixar. I hope the toys survive. I hope Pixar creates more films other than Toy Story. 71.138.69.134 (talk) 05:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

This comment isWP:Forum and it does not belong here. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 15:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC).

Seperate sections

I have just removed the seperate sections (Human characters, Sunnyside Daycare toys etc.) from the vooice cast section as this is not necessary since we do not have this on other movie pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Another problem

The link that mentioned that John Cygnan would voice Twitch has been taken down (it was the same link of who would voice Spanish Buzz which now has a different link mentioned it) and this cast voicer has been removed but now it has been re added again without the source. If anyone can find that link again put it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Plot section removal (hopefully to stave off revert war)

The citations for the plot section do not support the plot section as it is written. The IGN article only discusses one scene where Andy's mother throws out the toys by accident and Woody attempts a rescue (and mentions the existence of a few other characters by name), and the WSJ article only mentions the day care center in passing. Neither mentions any information that is present in the last 4 paragraphs (or even the last half of the first paragraph) of this plot summary. Unless there are citations for that stuff, it is original research until reliable sources post plot information. Kjl (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

You are absolutely right and that is what happened. But if you read my comment below of what has kept happening lately, I think there is more to it than just that. trainfan01

Actually I have recently noticed a lot edit warring going on with the plot section as it keeps getting re-written differently again and again. Whatever is going on here needs to be stopped. trainfan01

What's with all these problems?

The plot section has now been decreased to only 2 short sentences mentioning only the start of the film. The comment above stated it had to be shortened but now it is ridiculous to have it this short. There is also a section on the soundtrack but this is unsourced and there is no mentioning where the songs are confirmed (4 is kinda short and there is likely gonna be more songs than just that). This all needs to be cleaned up.

I have removed the very short sentences from the plot making this section completely blank. Feel free to start over again, but don't restore just the very short sentences I mentioned above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The very short sentences I mentioned above have been restored back on this page with no changes done at all. I have removed them again as it still seems out of place. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 03:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC).

Better yet, if this continues, this section shall be deleted until the film is released. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 02:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC).

I have tagged all the soundtrack songs for citations. If no one can find proof of these by tuesday they shall be deleted. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 04:14, 13 June 2010 (UTC).

Too many spoilers in the plot summary

What happened to the plot summary that was up a month ago? It wasn't spoiler-filled, but adequately lengthy, and it summed up the film's premise in a nutshell. The summary right now contains too many spoilers relating to Lotso the bear's past. We must have a solid, non-spoiling plot summary until June 18th or an earlier date whenever the film premieres wherever. We could even reduce the summary to that two sentence about Andy leaving for college, and the toys worried about their future. I'm going to try something with the plot, as we must not spoil anyone who comes here before release date. Please, understand many people are excitedly anticipating the plot, and do not want to be spoiled about everything! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chopperface116 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The summary as it stands is very basic. It stops right where the College Cliffhanger Screenings ended, and that's what I saw. Believe me when I tell you there's a lot more to the plot than just what's written here. Jokes, minor and important (not mutually exclusive) plot details, and the very beginning of the film aren't here, so rest easy. Someone could read what's written here and still greatly enjoy the film. In other words, don't fret. dogman15 (talk) 04:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The film can actually change between the preview screenings and finished product. That is why we do not include fleshed-out plots before the film is released in final form. SpikeJones (talk) 02:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm 99.9% sure that Pixar didn't change a thing from the version I saw. Mine was only in 2D and lacking an ending, which we already know thanks to books on sale right now. That the film can "actually change between the preview screenings and finished product" is the most nonsense thing I've heard about Pixar. dogman15 (talk) 03:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Unless YOU are the filmmaker, you can't claim that Pixar isn't going to change anything and predict an article's content based on what you think you're sure about (otherwise it's WP:OR). SpikeJones (talk) 01:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

btw - per WP:FILMPLOT, plots of upcoming films need to be completely cited from external sources. AFTER the film is released, then the full plot points can be included. I am restoring the plot to an older acceptable version; you can rewrite it after June 18th. SpikeJones (talk) 01:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Killjoy :P dogman15 (talk) 03:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I know you meant well, but you have to separate fanboy-ism and emotions over a new product from the desire to ensure that WP is edited in the correct and consistent manner. WP:NOT a crystal ball, so anything future (including movie releases) needs to wait until they actually happen for real, not just occur in previews to a select audience. SpikeJones (talk) 04:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

As of recent notice the plot now appears to have been completely copied from Pixar Wiki except for the last sentence. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC).

That's ok; Wikia uses cc-by-sa for contributions, meaning we can share text between there and here (though attribution should be made of whomever copied who). --MASEM (t) 01:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this section has also been tagged with no references or sources which were up here a while ago. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC).

You want plot citations?

There are at least six reviews of the film out now, and all of them are in line with the summary Wikipedia has here. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/toy_story_3/ Go have fun citing. :P dogman15 (talk) 07:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Bogus Synopsis Climax/Denouement?—From MEXICO

This edit was from an IP address in Mexico: 189.216.191.230.

It’s the only contribution from that IP address. Is this legit??

---Schweiwikist (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Soundtrack listing

I have recently found the soundtrack listing for Toy Story 3 here:http://pixarblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/toy-story-3-soundtrack-album-preview.html and this is what it shows:

  1. We Belong Together
  2. You've Got a Friend in Me (para el Buzz Español)
  3. Cowboy!
  4. Garbage?
  5. Sunnyside
  6. Woody Bails
  7. Come to Papa
  8. Go See Lotso
  9. Bad Buzz
 10. You Got Lucky
 11. Spanish Buzz
 12. What About Daisy?
 13. To The Dump
 14. The Claw
 15. Going Home
 16. So Long
 17. Zu-Zu (Ken's Theme)

And, I think it should be added to the soundtrack list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 21:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I have inserted all these in now. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC).

Runtime

Why does it say 103 minutes? It is confirmed to be 102 minutes by Lee Unkrich and even a movie site has the full runtime of Toy Story 3 along with Day and Night. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 21:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

The runtime is technically 1 hour, 42 minutes, and 31 seconds, or 1:42:31. It is the confusing issue of rounding that has people wondering how many minutes it officially is. dogman15 (talk) 21:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

How about 102 minutes 31 minutes?Can we credit it that way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TSFan1 (talk • contribs) 22:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

"102 minutes 31 minutes" makes no sense whatsoever. dogman15 (talk) 23:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh!I meant seconds!Sorry, little goof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TSFan1 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Remaining plot

Some anonymous user finished off the plot's ending (a bit too much detail here) without providing a source. It is only shortly mentioned in the Toy Story 3 essential Guide book I have and that is all I can find of the ending. I don't think the rest of it on here is correct. I am removing it. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 02:08, 15 June 2010 (UTC).

Done. I have deleted every bit of info after the paragraph of Buzz in Spanish mode. Re-add it when the film is released or if a source is given. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 02:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC).

Someone just re-added all of what I deleted with still no source. STOP NOW! trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 02:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC).

Don't know why you guys are so uptight about this... but I did recently read an outline of the plot in a kid's book tie-in to the movie. There are probably lots of commercial sources like the kid's book with the plot outlined in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.42.176.196 (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Citations, please.  
Whatever that "kids-tie-in" is, it needs to be cited! The publicly available teasers and trailers tend to conceal the actual plot structure, and the details from the sneak preview(s) haven’t been cited either. As I have not seen it, nor read the book, I can only figure this out by inference.
In the meantime, some of the writing as it is, could use some help. As the dad of a 4-year-old girl who’s ready for her first cinematic experience, I have an interest in a great movie and a good WP article.
---Schweiwikist (talk) 20:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

DANGER SPOILERS ARE INTACT IN ENTIRE PAGE *faints* X_X Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 14:19, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Chill, dude. It's everyone's responsibility (for those who haven't seen a film) to avoid anything that might contain plot details before the release of a film. This includes Wikipedia. dogman15 (talk) 17:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Yeah, fine. Wikipedia's rules are always against me. 9_9 Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 17:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Entire film story available on store shelves in graphic novel form as of 6/16 A print citiation will be in place once this editor’s daughter is in bed early tomorrow morning (UTC).
Schweiwikist (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh? trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 00:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

This section is also tagged as being overly long and way too detailed(such as the statement about the reaset button being pressed for more than 5 seconds which is not really that important to describe) so this has to be cleaned up anyway. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 00:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

Umm, how can this plot exist if the film hasn't been released? I'm about ready to delete every bit of it. Mike Allen 01:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the last paragraph on the credits blurb as since first of all they don't say anything during sections like that in any of the books, second of all Lee Unkritch confirmed on his Twitter a while ago that this film will have outtakes (like A Bug's Lfe, Toy Story 2 and Monsters inc). trainfan01

Now that the film is released, it turns out that the closing credits layout is more like that of the film Cars. trainfan01

Andy's Age

Just saw this film. Woody states that Andy is "17 now." 龍屠者 (talk) 13:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Andy is 17 in this film. 97.77.51.32 (talk) 07:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Error in Article

Someone put "...in the United Kingdom and Ireland" in the Article, where it should actually say "Great Britain and Ireland". Great Britian and Northern Ireland ARE the United Kingdom, or if the sentence is to include all of Ireland, it shouild read "...in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.171.0.31 (talk) 20:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Trilogy Ending

"According to a recent article by Lee Unkrich, there are no plans for another sequel. However, while Unkrich has confirmed that Toy Story 4 is not planned, the characters (Especially Woody and Buzz) will live on in a series of short films (The first of which will be attached to Cars 2 )."

Where is this proven. The info is completely unsourced and none of the refrences below mention this anywhere. If no source is given in the next 2 days it will be deleted. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC).

Well, it must be... Woody and all the Toys died in the incinerator at the end of the movie. Which by the way, is not mention in the article. Somebody should add it.--200.95.132.17 (talk) 06:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You never watched the movie if that's what you think happened.24.191.57.248 (talk) 02:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

What really happened is they were about to die but the aliens controlled the claw and caught the toys right in time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domecraft (talk • contribs) 18:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

lol,200.95.132.17 what did u say ? are you crazy ? please watch the movie completely and how many high class animations have you seen that main characters die in it !? lol !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiBahal (talk • contribs) 15:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh? trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 03:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC).

Edit request from BenGarcia, 19 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Toy Story 3 has been so critically successful that it is now a possible Oscar contender for Best Picture. A Facebook group has already been made, and could make history as first animated Best picture Winner.Toy Story 3 Oscar Contender

BenGarcia (talk) 06:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Until we have a source for this, there is not a need to change the article. Please let us know when you have a good source, and we will make the change. Facebook is not a reliable source.

 Not done ^Avicenna_sis @ 06:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the spam! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.54.61 (talk) 02:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Lotso and Sid

Sid was driving the truck in the beginning that the toys almost got thrown out in, and he was driving the truck that took them home in the end. He wasn't the guy who tied Lotso to his truck. --DrBat (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Realease

The Movie was also realeased in Mexico on June the 18th, an in many theathers in brasil, June the 18th was the premiere in the whole continent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.153.192.196 (talk) 21:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Possible section on Religious themes

The story did mention a lot of themes about death and what happens afterward if you think about it. Purgatory is the caterpillar room. Butterfly room is reincarnation. Incinerator is hell, Bonnie's house is heaven. If you think about it, it even has the "hand of God" (the claw) "saving" them.24.191.57.248 (talk) 02:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

That is pretty interesting. But with no sources, they won't let you put that on there. --Evilbetty1991 (talk) 04:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:Original research is a good read. Mike Allen 05:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

"Facial Hair"

Some trolling in this article. There is an article an facial hair that says "Woody says he loves facial hair and he wants to grow a beard all the way down to his feet and beyond!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!". This needs to be deleted. I'd do it but it's locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.114.235 (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh? Where is it? I don't see it anywhere in any recent edit histories. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC).

Armond White controversy?

As many people know from this review, more or less "infamous" movie critic Armond White felt the need to harshly critique what was previously a universally praised film. Needless to say, it sparked much discontent with others who enjoyed the film to the extent that The Wall Street Journal wrote an article on it, which can be read here. Because there exists a source detailing just how controversial the review was, I have the need to have it mentioned in the Reception section of this article. Immblueversion 23:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Are you retarded? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.54.61 (talk) 02:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you to whoever removed that. Though if either of those articles go in, I'd say this one should be included as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.230.168.234 (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Skinnybad, 21 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please change movie gross to 109,000,00 as per http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=toystory3.htm

Skinnybad (talk) 04:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

 Not done Domestic gross is 109, total gross, as the article says, is 153. CTJF83 pride 05:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

What was Lotso's treacherous act(s)?

"Woody and his friends convince the henchmen of Lotso's treachery". There is no explanation of what this means in the article. Either that or there's something missing about why the other toys are called henchmen. I assume that his henchmen knows what he's done? 75.72.171.47 (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Promoted trend

I'm new at this...

The fact that Toy Story 3 was heavily promoted on Twitter as a promoted tweet an the very first promoted trend on twitter is a very relavant part of the marketing for Toy Story 3. It should be included in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.26.236 (talk) 15:18, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Drummersam666, 23 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} i would like to improve this page (Toy Story 3) by add some supplementary details about the plot,please. thanks for listening. Drummersam666 (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: You didn't provide what information you want to change. SpigotMap 18:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Protected edit requests are for requesting that people make specific edits for you. If you just want to be able to edit it, you have to stick around long enough to be an auto-confirmed user. Find another interesting article and do some cleanup -- you should be able to edit protected articles in under a week. Bear in mind, though, that plot sections of movies are supposed to be relatively short -- you might not want to add too many supplemental details here. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

About the statement that files from the first movies were unable to open.

Hi, the citation provided with the statement that the files from the first movie couldn't be open says something different. It says that: “It’s like a ‘Read Only’ file,” the director says with a laugh. “Ultimately, we could look at the images, but couldn’t do anything with them. We kind of had to start from scratch.” I think that could be edited because what is on the wikipedia article sounds like the files were fully corrupted which is not the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.106.120.79 (talk) 05:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Lenny

Should Lenny be included in the list?I mean, instead of Lenny with the listed written out characters, you should have Etch,Snake and Robot,Troll doll with Bo Peep,Wheezy and RC.Not Lenny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 20:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

They are were all written out of this film. They can be included. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 01:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC).

Jeremy Mansfield as Chatterbox

Please note, Jeremy Mansfield a South African... DOES play the voice of Chatterbox. The IMDB record is incorrect : http://www.timeslive.co.za/entertainment/article445192.ece/Jeremy-Mansfield-in-Toy-Story-3 So whoever keeps reverting the change please stop.

http://www.news24.com/Entertainment/SouthAfrica/Jeremy-Mansfield-in-Toy-Story-3--20100511

The voice for Chatterbox is a South African. Hence the lack of an American accent.

W1z4rd (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

"Jeremy Mansfield" may or may not do Chatter Telephone's voice in the South African dub/version of the film, but there is no doubt that Pixar animator and Day & Night director Teddy Newton does the character's voice in the main, , and primary version of the film. Here are my sources:

http://pixarblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/visiting-pixar-stories-people-part-iv.html http://pixarblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/new-ts3.html

I just checked your sources, and they say that Jeremy "lend[s] his voice to the character of Lifer...". Chatter Telephone is not named "Lifer" in the American version. The second article you link to goes on to say "Under the direction of Rick Dempsey, Senior Vice President, Creative - Disney Character Voices, Mansfield will record the voice for the South African theatrical and DVD release of the film." Not the main version. If need be, I'm re-correcting the cast list to reflect this reality. dogman15 (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Aaah. Okay. Understood the correction W1z4rd (talk) 08:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding setting...

This is not a forum
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
If Andy had his eighth birthday in the first film (which took place in November of 1995), and was about a year older in the second film (which had to have been set in\around 1996), how could he be 17 in this film? It doesn't add up. For instance, his sister is an infant in 1995, and is only about 10-12 years old in 'Toy story 3'. This would place her birth at around 1994-1995, and would make the movie take place in 2007 at the latest. However, Andy would be about 19-20 years old. Additionally, the technology displayed (namley the 4th gen iPod, LCD Monitors, and apple labtop model) would set this film in at least late-2008, mid-2009. Does anyone else see a problem here? 71.169.24.59 (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2010 (UTC) You're right. And how do all those toys talk, I've never seen a talk or move on its own free will. And I've never seen people so computer-generated. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 12:30, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Oh, how clever--my sides are splitting. Either way, seeing as how this franchise has a thing for continuity, it is important. It's more about just figuring out when the film takes place... 71.169.24.59 (talk) 12:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm not sure if it is encyclopedic or not. This would probably be a better question for the forums. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 12:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Understood... 71.169.24.59 (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Is is worth mentioning in the article?

Is it worth mentioning that the series ends the exact same way it started, with a shot of clouds? (in the first, it's Andy's wallpaper, and in this one it is actual clouds) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.60.93.17 (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Only if its notability was covered by a reliable third-party source. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 15:35, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I know about the first one (after the Walt Disney Pictures/Pixar Animation Studios intro the camera pans away from the clouds and turns away). As for the second it may have been coincidential. Also if this is at the end of the credits film sequences or at the end of the film before the credits film sequences (I have not seen the film yet) we cannot be accurate. User:trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 15:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC).

More detailed plot

Do you think we could make the TS3 plot more detailed like Pixar's wiki?For example: The film opens with a train being driven and everything is calm until we see One-Eyed Bart exit a cart with bags of money when we hear a whip and we see Sheriff Woody who gets ready to arrest One-Eyed Bart until he announces he is not alone and then you see his wife who tries to scare him off the train and then whacks him with her purse, and Woody falls off only to land on Bullseye along with Jessie. Then the Mr. and Mrs. set off the explosives and run off on a car driven by the Aliens. Woody tries to save the orphans(troll dolls) but the train keeps going and falls off the bridge and then we see Buzz Lightyear holding the whole train up and putting it down in a safe place and rescuing the orphans(trolls). We then see the Evil Dr. Porkchop who along with the one-eyed couple try to destroy Woody, Buzz, Jessie and Bullseye. Rex and Slinky known as the dinosaur who eats force field dogs run off scared. Then you see Andy as a kid finishing the story. His mom then comes in with a video camera and the home video sequence begins.

Andy (John Morris), now nearly 17 years old, is just three days away from heading off to college, and his toys, including Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), are worried about their uncertain future as other toys (such as Bo Peep and Wheezy) have been "yard saled" over the years.

Andy plans to keep Woody and put the others in the attic, but his mother (Laurie Metcalf) accidentally throws them away. Also, Molly (Beatrice Miller) isn't going to miss Andy when he's gone and doesn't care about her toys (throwing Barbie into the donation box without even caring).

Woody goes to save his friends (trying to have Buster help,but is too old to help) but it turns out that the toys escaped and are hiding in the back of the Davis's car, thinking Andy has thrown them away. Jessie (Joan Cusack) thinks that the toys should take charge of their own destiny, and convinces them to stow away in a box of other toys headed for donation to Sunnyside Daycare, while Woody attempts to explain to the toys that they were accidentally thrown away. Before they can leave, Andy's mom closes the back door and drives to Sunnyside to donate some old toys.

The gang arrives at Sunnyside just as the children leave for recess. The Sunnyside toys welcome Andy's toys with open arms, including the leader of the daycare, Lots-o'-Huggin' Bear (Ned Beatty) (A.K.A. "Lotso"), and a smooth-talking Ken doll (Michael Keaton) , who falls in love with Molly's Barbie doll (Jodi Benson). The toys are keen on starting a new life at the daycare, except for Woody, who has suspicions about the daycare because of the Chatter Telephone (Teddy Newton), and also thinks that the toys shouldn't turn their back on Andy so quickly.

The toys think Woody should stay with them at Sunnyside, but Woody reluctantly leaves to find Andy. Woody escapes from Sunnyside using a hang glider, but ends up losing his hat and getting stuck on the branch of a tree. Woody is soon taken home by a sweet little girl from Sunnyside named Bonnie (Emily Hahn), who takes him to meet her own toys, including Trixie the triceratops (Kristen Schaal), Mr. Pricklepants the hedgehog (Timothy Dalton), Dolly (Bonnie Hunt), Chuckles the Clown (Bud Luckey), and Buttercup the unicorn (Jeff Garlin). As Woody tries to recuperate himself and continue his search for Andy, Chuckles explains to Woody the dangers of Sunnyside.

Chuckles tells Woody that himself, Lotso, and Big Baby, one of the toys at Sunnyside, were once owned by a loving girl named Daisy. However, one day, during a family trip, Daisy fell asleep and her parents took her home, accidentally leaving the toys in the countryside. They returned to Daisy's house to find that Daisy's parents bought a new Lots-o'-Huggin' Bear for her, leaving Lotso feeling betrayed and confused. The toys set out on their own (by riding the Pizza Planet truck), and were bumped off over at Sunnyside where Lotso and Big Baby quickly rose to power and transformed the daycare into a toy prison, along with Chuckles before he was injured and was taken by Bonnie.

Woody quickly realizes that he must save his friends and get back to Andy before he leaves.

Meanwhile, the rest of the toys are tortured by abusive kids at the daycare. Mrs. Potato Head, through one of her eyes at Andy's house, discovers that Andy is actively searching for the toys and did not mean to throw them away. The toys form a plan to get out of the daycare room which proves unsuccessful. That night, Buzz follows some of the daycare toys into a snack machine where he discovers the evil intentions of the daycare. The Sunnyside toys capture Buzz, reset him into his original Space Ranger mode, and manipulate him to be a henchman for Lotso. When the other toys confront Lotso about this, they are imprisoned for the night by Buzz while they contemplate Woody's fate. All they have as a memory of him is his hat, which was found by Big Baby earlier in the Sunnyside playground.

The following morning, Woody returns to Sunnyside through Bonnie's backpack. He sneakily reaches his friends and tells them that he's sorry for leaving them. They quickly formulate an escape plan to find Andy with the help of the Chatter Telephone.

That night, Woody and Slinky sneak through Sunnyside to the main office, where Chatter informed them that a cymbal-banging monkey (referred to simply as "The Monkey") monitors the security system throughout the entire daycare to prevent toys from escaping. A brief fight ensues, ending with the Monkey locked in a filing cabinet. Slinky signals to the other toys, still locked up by Lotso, and while Mr. Potato head provides a diversion, they make their escape. During the escape, the reset Buzz is captured and held down by the toys. They attempt to fix him, but accidentally reset him into Spanish mode, much to the toys' discomfort and Jessie's amazement (Hamm calls it "The Return of the Astro-Nut").

They make their way out onto the playground, and after several close-calls, manage to reach the garbage chute. Here, Chatter tells them, is where broken toys are sent, and is the only way out of Sunnyside.

As the toys prepare to leap to freedom, however, they are confronted by Lotso, who had "broken" Chatter into informing him of the escape plan, along with several of his henchmen. Woody, having been informed of Lotso's past, brings up the subject of Daisy, causing Big Baby (and by extent the other Sunnyside toys) to turn against him. A brief scuffle follows, during which Lotso and Woody fall into the dumpster at the bottom of the cute just as the garbage truck arrives.

Having been thrown into the rear of the truck, a small TV falls on Buzz, resetting him to his normal self.

The toys find themselves at the Tri-County Waste Plant, where the aliens notice a large crane in the distance, reciting one of their catchphrases, "the claw...," and proceed to venture off toward it. The rest of the toys, meanwhile, are dumped onto a long conveyor belt of garbage heading towards a set of shredders. They manage to avoid the shredders, including Lotso, who is helped to safety by Woody and Buzz. The conveyor belt then moves upwards, however, sending them toward the central incinerator. Lotso notices an emergency shutoff switch at the top of a ladder, and with Woody's and Buzz's help, manages to reach it. Rather than shutting off the belt, however, he betrays them and walks away. The remaining toys are dropped into a large chamber, where the shredded garbage is falling in an enormous bowl toward the central incinerator. The toys seem resigned to their fate, and join hands as they accept their inevitable death. Just then, however, the aliens use the crane's claw to pull them to safety, where they are able to hitch a ride back to Andy's house on a garbage truck driven.

Lotso, in the meantime, finds himself strapped to the front of another truck by a garbageman, who'd owned a Lots-o'-Huggin' Bear when he was a kid.

The toys manage to return to Andy's room undetected (riding Sid's garbage truck), where they pack themselves into a box labeled "Attic." Woody, meanwhile, prepares to journey with Andy to college, when an idea strikes. Andy discovers the box, and finds a note Woody left on the top.

He drives the toys to Bonnie's house, where he pulls them from the box and passes them on to her one by one, explaining their names, personalities, and other traits. Finally, Bonnie looks into the bottom of the box and sees Woody, exclaiming, "my cowboy dolly!" Woody, who had jumped into the box before leaving the note, leaves Andy confused about how he'd gotten in there. Andy makes to pull Woody away from Bonnie and toward himself, but then sees the sad look on her face, as well as all of his other old toys lined up together with her. In one last symbolic gesture, he gives Woody to Bonnie, telling her that they've been through a lot together and he means a lot to him, so she's got to take good care of him. Bonnie gladly accepts, and Andy joins her in playing with what are now her toys one last time. Soon, it's time for Andy to leave, and as he sits in his car and prepares to pull away, he looks back to see Bonnie waving Woody's hand at him. He smiles, thanks his toys for a great life together and accelerates down the road.

The end credits show Andy's toys getting used to life at Bonnie's, while Sunnyside is now a happy place for new arrivals as well as old toys, co-managed by Barbie and Ken. Zurg is also donated to Sunnyside and the last scene is with Jessie and Buzz dancing to the spanish version of "You've Got a Friend in Me".

Like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 21:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:FILMPLOT BOVINEBOY2008 :) 22:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Pixar Wiki has different standards. On this site, plots must not be overly long and detailed (as the above is clearly that). Plus it is slightly WP:COPYRIGHT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainfan01 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Can we at least improve the western setting plot info?I mean, it's not being specific of what the adventure is about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 19:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Bo Peep

They wrote several toys out of the movie because their actors died, but why'd they get rid of Bo Peep? Annie Potts is alive. The one thing that I thought after seeing the movie was that they got rid of her, leaving Woody alone. It just doesn't seem right --Bybbyy (talk) 05:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. dogman15 (talk) 06:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Start one! I'd love to talk about this! Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 00:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

is it the final film of the franchise?

I know it might be unknown some people think it might be the final film of the franchise since andy gave the toys to bonny since he is older.And the toys decided to settle in their new lives —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belrien12 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, final film. But it doesn't end the franchise. They're planning a TS short with Cars 2. Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 00:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

However, about it being the final film has changed with now the possibility of another sequel, see comment below. trainfan01 6:04, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

LGM 1, LGM 2 and LGM 3

What on earth are these characters we have listed in the cast? There is no description of what these are and this is not listed on IMDB. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 21:58, 30 June 2010 (UTC).

These are the aliens fro mthe earlier films--LGM = Little Green Men. 71.245.212.153 (talk) 03:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

You are probably guessing. It was deleted anyway. trainfan01 18:50, July 10, 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 01:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC).

Zurg

Shouldn't we include Zurg in the non-speaking characters section?

Spanish Buzz

Shouldn't we include Spanish Buzz's voice actor in the cast section?

For both, no. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 01:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Why not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 20:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

For Zurg it would not be neccessary as there are actually dozens and dozens of non-speakers in the film (a lot more than we have listed). I don't understand about the Spanish Buzz actor not being included. It was listed here a while ago and then it was deleted. If we go by this logic, Lee Unkrich as Jack In The box should be removed as well (he has only one line that is heard twice). trainfan01 14:17, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

I am reinserting Spanish Buzz's voice actor back in the cast section since no reason was given why it was deleted. trainfan01 7:15, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Is this really the final installment ?

citation needed in beginning of article.--WikiBahal (talk) 15:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to be bold and pull the word "final" out, seeing as there is indeed no citation for it and it appears there is at least the possibility per [1] that there will be a 'Toy Story 4'. Jusdafax 22:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

confirmation

In this article and on the characters article it says that Sparks is voiced by Jan Rabson. However after seeing the film recently I don't recall hearing him ever speaking. Can anyone be accurate about this. trainfan01 21:32, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Even if a character never has any lines, if an actor is credited as that character, then it means that the character makes some sort of vocal utterance. In this case, Sparks speaks at the "poker" game in the vending machine. Paraphrasing, it was something like - Chunk: [referring to Buzz] He ain't the sharpest knife in the... place where... they keep the knives. Sparks: Neither are you, Chunk. dogman15 (talk) 08:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Sequel Outlook

According to The Wrap [2] the possibility of a sequel exists. I have just once again removed the words "and final" from the lede, and suggest we keep it that way, which as I see it is the way to be "encyclopedic". Jusdafax 19:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I have now inserted your said link on to the franchise page. trainfan01 9:59, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Page protection request

I've just requested a month of semi-protection at WP:RPP to put a halt to ongoing IP vandalism on the article pages. In a month the film will be leaving theaters and much of the current vandal/spammer interest should die off. Jusdafax 12:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC) UPDATE: Admin HJ Mitchell has decided to give this page "pending changes" status - fair enough. Thanks HJ! Jusdafax 15:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Reception

Can people please refrain from using the words so far and early. These are both relative terms and don't indicate a specific time. These words could refer to any time and the review section should remain very general.Benatfleshofthestars —Preceding undated comment added 08:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC).

Why is the fairly negative quote from Relevant Magazine included under critical reception? it's a marginal magazine with a subscription level of barely 100,000, whose opinion hardly matters in the greater view of things. It's like quoting IMDb comments as a measure of critical opinion. 71.245.212.153 (talk) 03:21, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

hi just a small point, i changed the reception back to read that rotten toms is a review 'aggregate', as aggregator is not a word. also for the critical consensus it should read: The critical consensus is: ... don't use a is, because a comma is not appropriate here, i know it seems petty but a colon is the correct grammar not a comma. Benatfleshofthestars —Preceding undated comment added 13:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC).

its not the 4th highest grossing animated film of all time, its the 2nd with shrek 2 still in 1st http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=animation.htm ice age dawn of the dinosaurs isnt even in the top 10. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.201.235 (talk) 15:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

opening sequence

Having looked back through history, the info on the western action opening sequence keeps getting added and deleted and then reinserted and deleted constantly. The case of a plot needing a maximum of 400-700 words has been causing all this. This edit war ought to be sorted out. trainfan01 9:45, July 11, 2010(UTC)

The opening sequence is not part of the storyline and is unnecessary to include in a summary. SpikeJones (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

That is absolutely true, however, The Pixar wiki page for this film has this sequence stated as well (in almost every detail). trainfan01 18:44, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

Wikia isn't Wikipedia. Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 21:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

And you're absolutely right. trainfan01 19:55, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

In fact, a similar thing like this (not part of the plot) has also happened in the plot section on Those magnificent men in their flying machines that I keep trying to keep seperate (it is sourced) but it just gets reverted back. trainfan01 20:42, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

DVD release

I found this report on the Toy Story 3 DVD/Blu-Ray being release on Nov. 2 and there are 5 different variations: http://www.pixartalk.com/2010/08/rumor-toy-story-3-dvdblu-ray-on-november-2nd/ Should somebody add this to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.198.195 (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure would be nice if we had something to go on other than a rumor. Time to google up a WP:RS if one exists. Thanks for pointing it out! Jusdafax 20:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Posted on Amazon, I believe. But generally speaking, WP is not a marketing website. SpikeJones (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:MOSFILM suggests having a "Home media" section. Please do add it to the article when a reliable source becomes available.
In response to User talk:SpikeJones I have to say that despite the risk of too much marketing I'm afraid Amazon.com (and their subsidiaries Box Office Mojo and IMDB) are often sources of good information. An editor did suggest there should be more use of barcodes as reference and provide a search tool as Wikipedia already does for book, so that Wikipedia would be less biased to certain retailers. Unfortunately that suggestion was misunderstood by some creating more marketing not less. -- Horkana (talk) 23:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Quoteboxes added

I've installed a quotebox each from Tom Hanks and Tim Allen re: Toy Story 3. I put them in the 'Voice cast' section, where there was a lot of empty white space. Jusdafax 07:30, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I removed them, because it struck me as being a bit much for fair use quoting -- especially as the use was essentially decorative. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:58, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Not trying to badger, trying to learn. My reading of Fair use seems to contradict your statement, so I am wondering if there is a relevant Wikipedia policy concerning this that I am unaware of. Would shortening the quotes work for you? Do the colors seem too decorative? As for location, I'd be happy to locate the quoteboxes elsewhere in the article if you dislike the spot I chose, though two quotes from the two lead actors regarding the movie would seem to improve the article. Again, I want to improve this article and look forward to working with you and others to do so. Jusdafax 17:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Shortening the quotes would probably be a good thing. When I say "decorative", I'm not referring to the colors -- I'm referring to the content. The quotes don't really add to our understanding of the article -- they're just comments from the cast. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:00, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Noted, and I will do some editing to the originals and try again. Thanks! Jusdafax 02:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Flagged revisions

Perhaps there is a regional lag in Box Office Mojo but User:Látches rejected updates more than once although the figures had in fact been updated. With due respect to User:Látches I'm sure there is probably some reasonable explanation for this and (perhaps the named references made it seem like these changes had not been properly referenced) but reviewers can make errors just as easily any other editors and I feel it necessary to highlight how poorly Flagged revisions works in practice before it becomes entrenched and we are stuck, with it everywhere. -- Horkana (talk) 18:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

toy story

toy story 3 is the best movie and make sure you want to see toy story 3 it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.54.227 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

That's great but please read WP:NOTAFORUM and try to use the Talk page to talk about the Wikipedia article for Toy Story 3 and avoid general discussion about Toy Story 3. -- Horkana (talk) 23:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

My edit on the 5 Sept 2010

Sorry, my hand slipped when typing the edit summary! It was suppose to be:

Sorry, but this is the last film, the producers have confirmed

--Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 15:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Under the Box Office section / Asia / Japan, I believe it's the highest grossing foreign animated film ever released there, not overall animated. 'Spirited Away', 'Ponyo' and 'Princess Mononoke' all did better I believe, and all those 3 are domestic releases.

Final

Should it say "and final film" of the series, or has it been confirmed. --Talktome^(Intelati) 16:04, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

The mentioning of it being the final film has been removed multiple times. While it is true about what Lee Unkrich said ("no plans for Toy Story 4") which is what is stated in the first reference on this page, this source has the possibility of a sequel existent. Therefore to stay in check of this, the mentioning will be out of the article for now until a later coonfirmation is given. (There were probably no plans for this film originally when TS2 was released). trainfan01 16:11, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

"out of the article for now" Okay, Will do.--Talktome^(Intelati) 05:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Awards and nominations

The "Awards and nominations" table on this article is extending all the way down to the bottom of the page (past the "references" section) suggesting it has been formated incorrectly. I can't figure out how to fix this, but it definately needs to be formatted properly.trainfan01 18:44, Ocrober 13, 2010 (UTC)

The table in the section looks fine to me. Does it still look broken to you? Erik (talk | contribs) 14:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

No it is not, it looks fine now. The mess in it can be seen in this version and it has been fixed in this edit (one of the references had been formatted wrong). trainfan01 13:53, October 14, 2010 (UTC)