What went wrong?

What went wrong?

Attached: scale.jpg (3840x2160, 341.17K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=H8tzXFagaso
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Bug's_Life
disney.fandom.com/wiki/A_Bug's_Life
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

You know that's actually a pretty good question. As dismal as 2010s Pixar was, I actually don't know how or why it happened

They got the idea that there’s only one way to tell a story, one cast of characters to keep morphing into different species, one way to tell jokes and sob stories, and one message to spout dozens of times.

all the movies, from toy story to wall-e, were pitched in a single night in 1997 or whatever, everything else (and toy story 2 and cars) is a second thought

They became stagnant

They stopped making original stories in favour of sequels and generic movies we've seen done 100 times. Basically they sold out.

They had the feel to make every one of their movies oscar-bait after Up and wall-e were released.

Inside Out, Coco, Finding Dory, Incredibles 2, Brave, all good movies tbqh.

Inside Out was the last good one

incredibles 2 and brave sucked

You know what I will give Coco a pass too
Finding Dory was alright but didn't reach Finding Nemo's mark
The rest are no-go's

> Sequels
> Too prolific

No fuwwy movie

Attached: 013B0A4E-0E7C-48F2-A76D-5A750C233C51.jpg (191x226, 15.7K)

that sounds like porn

I disagree. As a huge fan of the original, a sequel to the 14 year old movie seemed like the worst possible idea, but it was great, all things considered. A perfect sequel to a great film. Finding Dory is a similar kettle of fish (heh), but I agree it wasn't as good as Finding Nemo. Brave is an underrated classic imo.

Wanna know how I know you're a woman?

Nope. Inside Out took a concept old Pixar would have made into a masterpiece and instead made it into a lazy, insipid, sterilized product.
>a girl's entire mind, from feelings to subconscious!
>5 one-note characters in a gigantic library, every memory is stored in an orb or something

Underage... female??
This is a cunnysseur neighborhood, run while you can

>Wanna know how I know you're a woman?
Sure, hit me up with your epic armchair psychology brainlet friend, I'd love a chuckle

>Inside Out
It's fine
>Coco
Decent
>Finding Dory
Definitely mediocre and forgettable
>Incredibles 2
K E K
>Brave
Literally no a cohesive story due the writters strike

Disney bought them out and Pixars priority became MONEY MONEY MONEY

Whoops, I forgot to mention that my taste is superior to everyone else's and is essential a metric for objective quality - your opinions are irrelevant.

>Inside Out
Good movie, best they made in the 2010s
>Coco
Second best, a limp twist but it had genuine emotion and solid animation
>Finding Dory
Once the actual story got started 45 minutes in it was decent, but the fact that they were making a sequel to a film that had no need for one is telling
>Incredibles 2
The world is not better with this in the world
>Brave
Gets a bad rap, but still not up to their former standards
Now let's look at the rest
>Toy Story 3
Solid, but still indicative of their over reliance on old ideas
>Cars 2 AND 3
Just sad, pure cash grabs
>Monsters U
I was very surprised to find this funny, but still another fucking sequel (or prequel in this case)
>The Good Dinosaur
Had everything going for it as a premise, but there is zero spark here
>Toy Story 4
One of the worst films I've ever seen, and the fact that they made it after sealing up the franchise fairly well with 3 is beyond pathetic
Haven't seen Onward, what are the the initial reactions? All in all, Pixar floundered for most of the decade, coasting off the backs of their previous successes

>implies it's bad psychology while at the same time conceding I was right in my assumption
>calling others brainlets while saying Incredibles 2 and Finding Dory were good movies

They're pressured to create a good movie every few years and that's just not possible.

Coco is probably the best movie they made in the 10s, Monsters U is a not-too-second close. Inside Out is pure trash. God, what a lazy movie.

>not-too-second close
Obviously, I meant not-too-close second. I haven't slept in 34 hours.

There was a time when Pixar looked like it cant do no wrong
It was truly amazing seeing a company coming from hit after hit

quick rundown on why incredibles 2 sucked?

Haven't seen it since it came out but I remember walking out pleased. Been meaning to rewatch, I know it has a mixed reputation around these parts

My problem with Incredibles 2 is that it's the same wank that the MCU gives itself about how cool and great superheroes are. It's really a MCU film with an Incredibles overlay.
Incredibles 1 was a far more balanced in its approach, showing the downsides and struggles of supers while also acknowledging their good intentions and their humanity

>implies it's bad psychology while at the same time conceding I was right in my assumption
Lmao no brainlet friend, I asked you how you thought you knew
Though I can see why you're so convinced you're smart if you go around thinking that everyone is conceding that you were right all the time lmao

Disney took over. Takes about 4 years to produce a movie so once they took over in 2006, you started getting sequels, remakes and politics. Occasionally a gem sneaks in (Inside Out) but usually not.

>Brave
A whole movie composed of 3 sets, the castle, the witch's den, and the mystical place. It was a hair and environment tech demo similar to dinosaur and it sucked.

>b-but not enough sets
Oh no, your goldfish attention span wasn't adequately satiated by the lack of constant visual stimuli? What a weak excuse for criticism.

Coco was good. So was Wreck It Ralph. That's about it.

You will never pass

SEQUEL WHEN

Attached: ABugLife_webthumb.jpg (439x312, 20.2K)

Wreck It Ralph is not a Pixar movie.
And Wreck It Ralph 2... judging by the trailers and every bit of promo, it seems like I would feel physically ill if I tried to watch the movie, the same way I felt watching Jesse Eisenberg play Lex Luthor. Sometimes too much cringe do make a nigga sick

Monsters U was trash except for half of the third act. Inside Out is the closest we've had to old Pixar in a while.

Everything after Ratatouille is what went wrong.

Lmao that's what I thought big brain
Utterly btfo

>2020 i am forgotten
Why is this the least talked abou Pixarkino canon

Nah, Coco is.
Inside Out is lazy.

That's a good question. After the release of cars, I thought that would remain their only substandard film and they'd continue pumping out great films as they had before; but cars actually defined the quality of pixar films ever since. I have no idea what happened.

Inside Out, it's basically the sitcom, Herman's head
youtube.com/watch?v=H8tzXFagaso

Joe Ranft's death was the beginning of the end for Pixar

Attached: Joe Ranft and Tim Burton.jpg (500x609, 153.26K)

Because Andrew Stanton left

It's by far the worst movie Pixar made prior to Cars 2

>Why is this the least talked abou Pixarkino canon
I'm legit curious. I guess it sold the least tickets and was the oldest that didn't have a sequel.

That intro alone had more charm, whimsy and wit than the entirety of the movie with 5 one-note muppets in a sterile white room that is meant to represent the mind of a child

Ratatouille gets my vote for best Pixar film, but WALL-E and Up are also very good

>Incredibles 1 was a far more balanced in its approach

That's cause it closely copies The fantastic four with hints of Watchmen. Haven't watch the sequel though.

That's Cars

Are you saying Cars 1 is better than A Bug's Life?

This is the correct answer and it’s fucking embarrassing that it took this long to be posted.

The people running these companies now are the generation that grew up fully indoctrinated into post-modernism. They just don't know story anymore. It's the same reason why the new Star Wars movies are so bad.

>underage and female/tranny
>btfoing anybody
Learn to be more inconspicuous

>That Ratatouille > Wall-E > U > Toy Story 3 run
It's like Rubber Soul through Abbey Road Beatles.

Sitcoms put more effort into their sets than Brave. The Room spent more on location scouting than Brave.

Cope
See

Yes
I respect that others have this opinion, I would put Cars above Bug's Life, but it is easily the next worst of the classics

Pixar is run by Jim Morris (a boomer)
and Pete Doctor (gen X)

I can sense the tears big lad

Those first three were already going down the slope quality-wise in my imo my opinion. While miles better than Brave or anything else from the 10s, Ratatouille, Wall-E and (to a lesser extent, since it's the best of these 3) Up were not as good as what came before.
Pixar peaked with The Incredibles.

A Bug's Life is an original, interesting story. Cars is a word for word ripoff of that 80s movie and it's 2 hours long and also has Owen Wilson in it. I don't see how you could possibly call it better.

didn't they focus a ton of money on post production in the early years and then kind get cheap towards current day?

>location scouting for an animated fantasy film

>Cars is a word for word ripoff of that 80s movie
Which one? Doc Hollywood?

Monsters Inc --> Nemo --> Incredibles is even more solid as a run, even though I think Ratatouille is still their best IMO

I agree with The Incredibles being the best and am surprised more people don't think so. But you really could put that and Up, Ratatouille, and Wall-E in any order and I couldn't fault you.

>AHHHHHHh OH MY GOD POST-MODERNISM [sic] IS HERE TO GET US
>I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEANS BUT PAUL JOSEPH WATSON SAID IT IN A SCARY VOICE ONCE SO I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S BAD

The entirety of Ratatouille could have been a single 22 minute episode of a cartoon without losing anything that made it important. In fact, it'd probably work even better that way.
It's to this day one of the least elaborate/complex movies they've ever made.

I was gonna mention the Watchmen influence but you can't bring that up around here without someone sperging about how much they hate Alan Moore

What?

Yeah. And even if it was an original story it's boring.
Why did you exclude TS2? That run is also great, you could take either. Fucking Cars had to break up the streak.

Attached: Bugs-collage.jpg (1920x1080, 1.22M)

>A Bug's Life is an original, interesting story.

2020, Seven Samurai, I am forgotten.

Now that I think about it... that's a great explanation for why 1 is so much better than 2.
1 took inspiration from classics like Jack Kirby's Fantastic Four (character dynamics and powers) and Watchmen, while 2 took inspiration from... the MCU...

Pixar wins, per usual.
It's nothing like seven samurai.

Lasseter quit being their main creative guy.

Eh I disagree. I take it you think Nemo is best? That's my #2

Toy Story 3's success taught them the wrong lesson and they started making a bunch shitty sequels and prequels, while not putting much focus into new ideas. Coco and maybe Inside Out are the only good new IPs they've had in the last 10 years.

Attached: 775435879.jpg (1248x241, 19.75K)

Curious, do you think Bug's Life is better than an pre-2010s Pixar film other than Cars?

>nothing like seven samurai

its in the wiki for christ sake
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Bug's_Life
disney.fandom.com/wiki/A_Bug's_Life