'Monsters University' Logo!

John Goodman, Billy Crystal and Steve Buscemi will reprise their roles as Sully, Wazowski and Randall Boggs in this Pixar animated sequel.

The official logo has been unveiled for the upcoming Pixar prequel Monsters University, which will hit theaters sometime in 2013. Click on the logo below to access our gallery.

Monsters University Logo

We reported last week that Monsters University is the new title for the Monsters Inc. prequel. John Goodman and Billy Crystal will reprise their roles as Sully and Wazowski in the sequel, with Steve Buscemi returning as the bad guy Randall Boggs.

No story details have been revealed at this time.

Monsters University was released June 21st, 2013 and stars Billy Crystal, John Goodman, Steve Buscemi, Helen Mirren, Peter Sohn, Joel Murray, Sean Hayes, Dave Foley. The film is directed by Dan Scanlon.



Sources: The Pixar Blog

Share this story yet?

0 0 0 0 0

RELATED STORIES

BEST OF THE WEB

Comments (33)

  1. Emmytt

    *SIGH*

    4 years agoby @emmyttFlag

  2. LuxoIII

    @diaigma lol why do you think I only had like 1 real friend in high school? FANBOY!!! :) But I agree, to each his own

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  3. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - good man. Stepping out of the closet is liberating, no? ;)

    I share much of your sentiments, but no one stays on top forever. That's why it's better to broaden the spectrum and find animation from unlikely sources that may surprise you. If one does so, when that high pillar falls, they won't be disappointed.

    To each his own :)

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  4. LuxoIII

    @diaigma True, I am a Pixar fanboy :) not because they "bought me" but because they make good movies, which is why I am confident in their future decisions. But if I'm wrong, then that's how it goes. Maybe Dreamworks will replace Pixar as the leading animation studio. Maybe someday you'll see my avatar changed to a fat panda a couple of years down the road. But until these movies come to pass in their full glory on the big screen, I say we just wait it out and see what happens :)

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  5. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - a "lamp" avatar, hyperbolic offensive at Dreamworks, unnecessary inclusion argument in Pixar's Defense . . . more than enough to press "fanboy," but that's not really a bad thing. Wear it with pride. Being defensive only confirms it ;)

    If you know how to look, you can judge a film's quality from a trailer, but I have more than that. I have friends in the industry. One of them left Pixar after the Disney buyout. The trailers for Dragon (sorry, but TS3 is more overrated compared to Dragon, agree to disagree) and Tangled were scoffed, but I saw the story behind it. There was quality. Few on MW believed me, but I convinced about a dozen (real number) to see Dragon and Tangled anyway. They thoroughly enjoyed them (some more than I). The problem with being "loyal" is that it's like wearing blinders. You won't pause for a second to go see it, even if you have misgivings.

    That's exactly what they want. They've bought you.

    I thought Airbender was going to be the best film of the summer.
    It was a story that was impossible to mess up.
    I told people not to judge it until they see it.
    Oops. I sure ate my words last July :P

    With trailers AND contacts from the inside, I can say that certain animated films will be bad or not. Take my word for it or leave it.

    Blue Sky is still young. Rio already has 8 reviews out. All fresh. 100%. If these shadows remain unaltered, I'll be there opening day.

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  6. LuxoIII

    @diaigma PS why would we have more to look forward to from Blue Sky? What do they have to offer? Their only good movies were the first "Ice Age" and "Horton Hears a Who." All they've made since was "Robots" and "Ice Age" sequels.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  7. LuxoIII

    @diaigma I'm not getting "fanboyish" I just prefer Pixar's output over other animation studio efforts. I really liked some of Dreamworks' productions, such as "Shrek" 1 AND 2, "Over the Hedge," and "Prince of Egypt," but there's still movies like "Shark Tale" and "Antz" that blemish their record. Also, you can't assume a movie is bad based on its trailer alone. That's just ridiculous. Many people thought, for example, that after seeing the first trailer for "The Dark Knight" that it would be the Joker's movie, with Batman pushed to the side, but that is obviously not the case. Therefore, you can't just assume that "Cars 2" will be a bad movie that focuses on Mater before even seeing it. That said, I do consider "Cars" to be the weakest in the Pixar lineup, so I will agree that "Cars 2" might be something to worry about. Okay, I agree Disney really doesn't handle their properties the way they should, but we haven't seen proof that this will affect Pixar's efforts in any negative way. Honestly, I think we're arguing the point too early. After "Cars 2" and maybe "Monsters University," then we can better discuss what direction Pixar is really going. Also, yes, I am loyal to Pixar because they have earned my loyalty. I didn't just decide to follow these guys, I have always just enjoyed and appreciated their output more than others. And, honestly, I think most animated movies are overrated: "How to Train Your Dragon" was the most overrated, while "Desp*cable Me" was just a rehash of what everyone's seen before.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  8. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - please don't get "fanboyish" on me. My response was civil.

    I never said TS 2 and 3 were "awful decisions," did I? Discard that argument.
    (albeit, the accolades and praises are overrated, for the most part)

    I've seen the trailers for Cars 2. They are awful. Having Mater at the focus is awful. Having a world WITH cars and NO people IS awful (and pointless). Moving on.

    I was more okay with the idea of a Monster's sequel, UNTIL it became a prequel.

    Here's some history. NEWT was supposed to come out this year. It takes Pixar 4 years (on average) to produce a full-length film. In 2006, Disney bought Pixar (TS3 was already in early stages at this time). NEWT was replaced with Cars 2. Thanks to Chapman's persistence, Brave managed to stay in the line-up (despite the title/directorial change), which was almost replaced by . . . Monsters 2 (Monsters U). See the pattern? So excuse me when I said "Pixar's awful decisions." I should have said "Disney's awful decisions, with their purchased resources."

    Let me clarify. I'm an animation fan. I could care less WHAT movie is made by who, but I will praise what is good and bunk what is not. I have no loyalties. Pixar's lamp is starting to flicker and I hope they change their bulb soon. Until then, we have more to look forward to from Blue Sky and that kid who fishes on the moon.

    Thank you.

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  9. LuxoIII

    @diaigma excuse me, "awful decisions?" What awful decisions? Was it an awful decision to make Toy Story 2 and 3, which have earned far more deserved accolades and praise than any Dreamworks film to date? Do we know that Cars 2 is an awful decision, having not seen it yet? Obviously you don't think Brave is an awful decision if you're looking forward to it (I am too). So, are all of these "awful decisions" based on "Monsters University" alone? Do elaborate.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  10. Diaigma

    I just realized what your avatar is. That explains a lot :P

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  11. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - let me explain something.

    Is coming out and saying "we have X sequels" a bad thing? Does it really coincide with the awful decisions Pixar is making lately? I wish studios would be more up front with their lineups. Dreamworks did not plan 5 sequels to Panda just because the first did well. ALL SIX FILMS were planned LONG before the first was ever finished. It's one large story arc. Granted, they made the first film a "stand alone" to see how it would fair before continuing with the others. That's just smart film making/marketable storytelling.

    If something is fully realized and ready to go, why wait? It actually keeps the production consistant with the actors and makes it less expensive (think LOTR).

    Transfallen, Iron Man 2, those are proper examples of "it was successful--how about another one!" With Panda, they have a consistent timeline and a planned arc that won't be compromised by improvements in animation techniques.

    With Pixar, they've shelved original projects and pulling a random sequel and a prequel on us. Toy Story's 2 and 3 were good, but those had potential to move on AND were intended to be made. Cars and Monsters do not have that. The sequel and Prequel of those films were thought of AFTER the fact with merchandising potential on the forefront. I'd rather have 5 planned sequels than 1"pulled-out-of-my-butt" sequel OR prequel.

    Having said that I very much look forward to Brave next year.

    Thank you.

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  12. LuxoIII

    at least Pixar's taking it one at a time

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  13. LuxoIII

    @diaigma it is a hyperbole! of course I'm not saying 3 dozen literally, but they have WAY too many sequels planned based on the success of just one movie.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  14. Nawtnt

    I love Monsters Inc., it is my favourite aminated movie ever and I think they should leave it to that as I think it was the perfect ending to the movie where Toy Story movies were getting better and better and Toy Story 3 was kind of a farewell to our chilldhood characters.

    I understand some people believe there should be a sequel to Monsters Inc. but sometimes a sequel can't always better than the orignal.

    The idea of a prequel isn't a good idea but let's jsut find out how it turns out to be.

    4 years agoby @nawtntFlag

  15. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - 3 dozen pre-planned sequels? Are you kidding me? 3 dozen?
    That makes 36 pre-planned sequels? 36? For what moderately successful film?
    I was only aware of 7. 2 for Dragon, 5 for Panda, from my buddy at Dreamworks!
    I can't take you seriously if hyperbolation is your backup argument :P

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  16. m2

    I just still can't believe that they are doing this a Prequel. They do a sequel to Cars but not this! ?

    4 years agoby @m2Flag

  17. LuxoIII

    @diaigma 3 dozen pre-planned sequels to one moderately-successful film puts them in that category. Besides, Pixar's done 2 fantastic sequels, but we have no idea how a prequel would be, so I wouldn't pass judgment yet.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  18. ejk1

    I'll withhold judgment for now. But I don't like prequels. Kind of soured on them by the whole Star Wars thing.

    4 years agoby @ejk1Flag

  19. Dan

    Cheap.

    4 years agoby @dan1Flag

  20. Diaigma

    @brady1138 - has Dreamworks made a prequel yet?

    . . .

    Didn't think so :P

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  21. LuxoIII

    I can't believe the negative response to this movie! Come on, guys, it's the right kind of logo for the movie with typical school-spirit font combined with the classic logo. It's probably not even the final logo design, it's pretty early for a logo.

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  22. LuxoIII

    @diaigma uh, no they don't

    4 years agoby @brady1138Flag

  23. moviegeek

    I could make this on Word. Puh-lease.

    4 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  24. Bawnian©-Dexeus

    I smell something burning.

    4 years agoby @bawnian-dexeusFlag

  25. ZanyZap

    My only hope is that they have not lost their creativity and just had an excellent idea for a prequel that they couldn't resist to produce. But with the sequel of Cars and now this... we'll see. I don't want to be the douche that said "I told you so" or the ass that said it would suck. Riding the fence is what I do best. :P

    4 years agoby @zanyzapFlag

  26. skywise

    Even the best run out of ideas i guess.

    4 years agoby @skywiseFlag

  27. Corey W.

    I mean, I'm just not interested.

    4 years agoby @coreyFlag

  28. Diaigma

    @jaysonb190 - even Dreamworks knows better than to pull this kind of thing :P

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag

  29. JaysonB190

    Whoa whoa whoa...that's...that's just unimaginative...I'd expect something like that from Dreamworks but Pixar? Come on guys, we (the viewing) know you better than that

    4 years agoby @jaysonb190Flag

  30. Diaigma

    @combatmadness360 - now that we know Pixar is prequel-able, I wouldn't be surprised if they gave Incredibles the same treatment. How about Mr. Incredible's and Elasti-Girl's super team-up that "started it all?"

    See? Anyone can pull a plot like that.
    What happened to your unexpected genius, Pixar? : /

    4 years agoby @diaigmaFlag