(GUEST POST WITH CALLIE!!!) Possible Pixar Sequels.
.jpg)
Silas:
Good afternoon. Hope that you're having a good day. We're here back with Callie. We're going to be reacting to some possible Pixar sequels. Callie, how are you doing?
Callie:
Really glad to be here and react to some of these things that you've come up with. Really excited to see where this goes.
Monsters, Inc. 2
Silas:
Okay, we'll start off. The first one is Monsters, Inc. 2. So you obviously have Monsters University, number two—or I guess it would be the sequel. Monsters University goes back in time. But if we’re going ahead with a second Monsters, Inc., remember these are all kind of like… what’s the word? Not flowerized, but they’re all—
Callie:
Dramatized?
Silas:
Dramatized, exactly, with AI. So I'm going to go ahead and read this one. I came with a basic plot, but AI kind of made it better.
Here’s what we have:
Doors suddenly start giving off scream energy, and Boo's door disappears into the old abandoned floors under the factory. Mike and Sully chase through the flickering hallways to stop an aged Scarer trying to bring scream power back. Sully finally tracks down Boo's lost door, only to find it leading to an abandoned camp on Earth—where a network of retired Scarers are trying to restore scream power for good.
Okay, Callie, initial thoughts?
Callie:
Initial thoughts? It sounds interesting, and I could definitely see Pixar coming up with maybe a Monsters, Inc. 2 or something to that effect. I don't know—going back into the real world to help Boo? That's a really interesting aspect. They've done a lot with Boo in the first Monsters, Inc. I feel like this has potential. I feel like the storyline needs a little bit of help. I do think they’re basically just going off of no new characters, not anything new. It's going back to the scream factory, going back to Scarers, going back to Boo. There's nothing new, but I think besides that, I think it's an interesting thing. I think they should do it. Monsters, Inc. is one of the classics.
Silas:
Yes, I completely agree.
Ratatouille 2
Silas:
Okay, secondly, we’ve got Ratatouille 2. This wouldn’t probably have any Pixar movie or Disney movie in general—why is there not a Ratatouille 2? I feel like it's a classic; it won an award. I forgot which one—not an Oscar, but it won something. It's a really good movie, 2007. I mean, it's not the best movie they’ve put out, but still, it deserves a Ratatouille 2.
Here’s the plot AI gave:
A top food critic collapses after eating at La Ratatouille, and everyone blames Remy. To clear the restaurant, Remy sneaks through Paris at night and uncovers a rival chef behind a secret plant. It becomes a race across rooftops and tunnels as Remy tries to save the restaurant's name before sunrise.
Callie:
Here's the thing—I feel like this would be the perfect storyline for not a whole full-blown movie, but more like a 7–10 minute short. I feel like that could work. I don't feel like a second movie would be as popular. I don't think Disney should go for that. There's only so many storylines you can explore considering they're rats cooking. Nobody, no real-life person wants that.
I think they did a good job ending it on that “we’re rats cooking, but we’re clean rats cooking” vibe. But I feel like they closed the story. It's such a narrow gap for a sequel.
Silas:
I agree, I think this could be more of a short. There's just not much there to go off of. I feel like Disney closed out the storyline so much that there's not much room for a second Ratatouille.
I love the idea of exploring the background of the original food critic—what made him mean. Going back in time, almost like Monsters University.
Callie:
Kind of like Finding Dory in a way, where they push aside the main characters and explore a side character. That’d be interesting.
Inside Out 3
Silas:
Third one—Inside Out 3. You have Inside Out (2015), then nine years later Inside Out 2 (2024). Loved that movie. Won Best Animated Movie of the Year. Great message, especially for modern Disney.
Here’s the proposed plot:
A hidden vault in Riley's mind opens, spilling out confusing flashes of her possible future. New emotions—Responsibility and Doubt—battle for control as Riley struggles with strange “future memory storms.” The team must calm the chaos before Riley makes a life-changing decision based on fear.
So how old is Riley now? College?
Callie:
College? I’d say college level.
I feel like Disney is definitely up for making a third Inside Out. It has potential to be good, but Disney could also completely ruin it by adding things that aren’t good or wholesome. I think they should just stick with Inside Out 2—don’t make another one, don't ruin it.
Silas:
See, I think if they didn’t ruin it, there’s so much to explore. Inside Out has so many ideas. College-level questions like “What are you going to do with your life? Leaving a legacy?”
Fans have grown up with the series. A kid who was five in 2015 is now a teenager. If they made Inside Out 3 in 2028 or 2029, those same kids are literally college age. I think that's powerful.
Callie:
That’s true. And unlike Ratatouille, Inside Out definitely leaves an open door. They didn’t close it out. She’s still growing up. The emotions are still there.
They could even add emotions like Nostalgia.
Meet the Robinsons 2
Silas:
Fourth—Meet the Robinsons 2. Not Pixar, but Disney, around 2005. Not super popular, but one of the most underrated plots ever.
Here’s the sequel idea:
Time starts acting strange—streets change overnight, inventions rewrite themselves, and Wilbur's time machine keeps glitching. Lewis discovers a future AI he created slipped out of its timeline. It wasn’t destroyed. It escaped. And now it's quietly rewriting moments to improve his life.
Callie:
It’s definitely an interesting idea. I’ve never considered a second Meet the Robinsons. It could go very well. It’s not as popular as Pixar, older, different animation—but fans would love this.
The AI angle is interesting.
Silas:
Honestly, fans would eat this up. An AI antagonist? Perfect fit for the franchise’s futuristic vibe. The idea that it's trying to improve his life based on what it thinks is right is really interesting.
Callie:
So you're wanting Disney to show AI in both good and bad light? Trying to be helpful but ends up damaging things?
Silas:
Oh yeah. It’s trying to improve his life, but it becomes faulty and dangerous.
Callie:
Interesting point—AI is only as knowledgeable as the knowledge people put into it. So it’s basically Lewis’s intellect turned into a misguided machine. Definitely an interesting angle.
Finding Marlin
Silas:
Fifth one: Finding Marlin.
Finding Nemo (2003) — classic.
Finding Dory (2016) — terrible plot, terrible acting, I don’t like it.
This could be their “get-right” movie.
Here’s the idea:
Marlin finds clues that Coral isn’t dead. A clever yellow tang named Drob guides him through murky, polluted reefs. He discovers Coral staged her death to secretly control a group of fish under her cruel rule. Marlin must choose: confront her and free the fish, or let her tyranny continue. The ocean feels alive and dangerous as he prepares to act.
Callie:
I have no idea. It’s kind of like an underwater Animal Farm. With pollution. With plastic water bottles.
The thing about Nemo is that Marlin loved Coral and was heartbroken when she died. Making Coral evil doesn’t feel like a good route. It doesn’t even fit the underwater vibe.
If they did a third movie, I do think they'd include pollution or reef destruction—very Pixar. But I don’t see Coral coming back. And I don’t know what the new character Drob has to do with anything.
Comments
Post a Comment