The first film had so much thought and heart put into it. They made it work with narrowing it down to four emotions. Therapists loved that simplicity when helping children who've seen the movie. Right after the first movie released, Disney announced the sequel and was excited to use words most kids wouldn't know like "ennui." I was excited until I saw the recent ads for Inside Out 2 on my phone games. I could tell it was one-note and not very exciting. And you helped confirm that by seeing it for yourself. Thank you for your input.
It's sad how Pixar wants to make more sequels and spin-offs instead of original movies. All because Elemental didn't make as much money as they wanted (even though Lightyear was a worse bomb), can't wait for Toy Story 5 Woody strikes back.
After I watched the first Inside Out, my 10yo self came up with an idea for a sequel where Riley and her family has to return to Minnesota because her grandmother is dying in the hospital. Over the course of the film, they share the great moments the have together and the grandmother gives her advice on how to live life and embrace the future before she dies. Not only that, but we also get to see what happens in this fictional human brain if someone dies. I still genuinely believe to this day that it would have been a much better idea for a sequel than what we actually got. I am still using that idea independent from the Inside Out franchise, though. Pixar, please hire me as a writer.
This would have been the sequel idea if this was made in the golden age of Pixar. This is the Toy Story 2 equivalent. This idea actually offers something new and gives a different perspective on the universe, unlike what we got. I hope they do hire you honestly, but then again I bet the higher ups at Disney would shut down that idea because it would make people feel too sad or some bs lol
Let’s just say it’s the equivalent of what happens in a Roland Emmerich disaster movie combined with a world that fades away before your very own eyes.
Also in this movie it seems that the emotions have more control over Riley which is weird. She doesn’t seem like a girl but a robot machine being controlled from the inside. When she goes to get that notebook, Anxiety wants her to do it but Sadness doesn’t. So when sadness gets the controller she stops Riley from reading the notebook, why? Why would the emotion of sadness change “Riley’s plan”.
@@kbrowning4449 it actually did better than helluva boss and hazbin hotel It had effort unlike it having the constant swearing and the sex jokes are obnoxious
@@moonzie37 yeah and I seen avatar And just because it's a family film does not mean Helluva boss isn't any better it's still worst than chicken little a disney disaster better left forgotten
What are these comments? No way this is a real comment section. the movie was great. The timing to watch after a decade since the first, the reviews are high and possitive, the message makes it very clear and is important to embrace your emotions & urself, it made me reflect on my own emotions. Then there's this video with a negative comment section that hasn't even seen the movie and took this guy's opinion💀
The comments are real, I guess some of my fans trust my judgement. If people are that interested though I would implore people to form their own opinion. "The timing to watch after a decade since the first" - The release date makes zero difference in the quality of the movie. "the message makes it very clear and is important to embrace your emotions & urself" - Literally the same message of the first one.
@@Joe15-ob4te I think that's crazy. His review of Cloudy 1 is one of the worst reviews on this site in my opinion. The quality between the first cloudy movie and Inside Out 2 is night and day. It's not even close.
I have to disagree, I personally really enjoyed the film! But I do respect your opinion, I think for me personally, I've kind of just looked past the similarities between this film and the first one, maybe it's because I haven't seen the first movie in a while but I personally think it was different enough to be similar to the original film but with different elements
8:14-8:18 I can most safely say that you have all the right to be worried, my fellow man. Mainly because many of these once big animation studios like Disney, Pixar and even DreamWorks have gotten very old at this point, so it's really no wonder why later ones like Sony and Illumination are doing so well unlike the former mentioned right now, because they are actually innovative these current days. Yes, Walt Disney Animation Studios was once the big ruler, but since their decline in the early 1970:s (with the exception of their short-term revivals in the 1990:s and early-to-mid 2010:s), they have lost their meaning and instead paved ways for other studios and animators that made newer and more innovative works (from Don Bluth, to Pixar, Dreamworks, BlueSky and so forth). Speaking of all of this, btw, this is also why I have to give cred to Blue Sky for actually shutting down once they got really "bankrupt" on creativity a few years ago (don't get me started on the disasterous Adventures of Buck Wild, btw, 'cause that wasn't even Blue Sky, but our "greedy Mouse").
I don't think you understood the moral of this movie? It's about the emotions having to accept Riley as who she is, with all her flaws, instead of having to accept a peer. Like a parent letting their child grow versus having gripes with how your coworker for how they approach work. Sure, anxiety and joy don't fully understand each other, but their distaste for each other is rooted in the same thing. Again, they want to impose their view of how Riley should behave. Anxiety does it in an obviously harmful way, meanwhile joy more covertly suppresses Riley from seeing herself fully as an actual human being with depth, instead of just "a good person". Hiding anything that /she/ doesn't want to think about.
Why is Pixar making sequels to movies that came out over ten years ago? There's a difference between making a sequel to an old monster movie and making a sequel to an old animated movie. One you can have a bad story and people will somehow enjoy it. The other, makes little sense and is instantly forgotten.
No, Inside Out still came out one year less than ten years after Inside Out. Toy Story 3 and Finding Dory, on the other hand...those did come out over ten years after Toy Story 2 and Finding Nemo, and were great sequels that I found to be worth watching again.
When everyone was praising it, I was waiting for real critics like you and YMS to review it because I knew that the reviews were either extremely rigged or biased.
You can have your own opinions. I was just saying that the people who reviewed it positively that I have seen seemed to be huge fans of Pixar already, but I am not a fan of Pixar and I think they are very overrated, so I was waiting for the critics I liked to give their actual thoughts on the film.
@@FirstClassJunk I have been rewatching their early work one last time before the movie came out, and it’s just sad to see a studio known for making something more innovative and creative films that had a cultural impact on everyone’s childhood just watch them slowly turn into this degrading state with just sequels, spinoffs, and the same story told over again.
@@FirstClassJunk That does not mean Pixar thinks original movie ideas will not make money anymore. The performance of one sequel film or one non-sequel film should not change the course of everything in the next few years.
This guy is just about HIS opinion, when we shouldn't be agreeing nor disagreeing with him. We should just be feeling about our OWN opinions on the movie and not encouraging others whenever to or to not see a movie! I'm sick and tired of negativity spreading like a virus. Sure it may be valid criticisms, but it shouldn't discourage you from watching said movies and forming your OWN opinions on it! Sorry for my own ramble!
I don't how to express it but something about this film was off, it felt artificial and empty in terms of depth and writing and its all spectacle and visuals ( except the soundtrack) and a bunch of new characters, yet despite all of this, the substance is shallow. The story is dull and the new characters both human and emotion characters are not properly explored story wise. But even then, Inside out 2 huge success proves the masses will settle for mediocrity so long it's of a familiar faces and franchises rather than new completely original films.
Honestly these takes are just baffling. I get having an opinion but I'm worried for your mental health if you're this pissed about a Pixar movie. Let alone, an amazing one like this
I thought I was quite calm in this video to be honest. Yet again I get an extremely vague comment saying that I'm wrong but doesn't elaborate on a single one of my points.
Inside out plot didnt catch me at first, but i ended up enjoying the moment. Not the best Pixar but a good one. The 2nd one... Out of all Pixar movie, i wouldn't have choose this one for a sequel (though still a better choice than Toy Story 4). I didn't see it yet but i am not sure i would. Toy Story was so excellent that the 2nd one was even better than the 1st one and the 3rd one was the perfect conclusion. Funny to see how most direct to video sequels from the 90's, despite being outright ugly, cheap, and sometimes, with massive plotholes... Have more soul and creativity in them compared to the newer high cost sequels. And obviously, animators aren't to be blamed for this. Or, in a way, most artists working on it. Can we put the blame on scenarists then, since the main problem of the sequels is the plot? In theory, this would make sense. But scenarists aren't lazy untalented peoples. I refuse to believe so. Maybe the problem come from producers who care about easy money rather than actual risk taking art. And there is nothing we can do. Even if the public, for whatever reason boycotted those movies, it wouldn't change the slightest. The companies would blame the audience rather than questioning themselves. Does it mean the audiences are always fair and right? I do not think so. It is more complicated than that. But again: their role is to entertain us. If the public doesn't like, fair or not, it is the game. Not a "shut up and give me your money for my stuff" situation. Edit: oh right about the unexpected ending. Like, where the movie is bringing you to! I forgot we enjoyed those! This is why I don't like Disney: for some reason, they are unable to keep a continuity. The MCU is doing okay, but look at Star Wars....
@@FirstClassJunk you mention Illumination. At first i was very skeptical of them, as i didn't cared for despicable me. But Sing! Was a nice surprise, Mario Bros Movie was awesome. I am way more positive with them now. I wouldn't be surprised if many from Disney join them soon.
Bruh you hate every animated movie that ever exists. Calling Inside Out 2 terrible is so blasphemous. I know it’s your opinion but you have terrible opinions on animation. Animated movies are not for you bud
@@FirstClassJunk calling modern animated movies lazy is just crazy and a little too harsh. I know it may not be as good as back then, but for modern animation you have like the Spider-Verse films, Mitchells vs the machines, Puss in Boots the last wish, Nimona, TMNT Mutant Mayhem, The Mario Movie, Inside Out 1 and 2, Elemental, Soul, Zootopia, Moana, Migration, and Klaus. Those are all really good animated movies in the modern day
@@SuperLuigi97 He basically just wanted this to be an original movie. I disagree with that but it is what it is. It may seem like he hates modern animated films, but that’s because he probably has a different view on what movies should be.
@@FirstClassJunk (Sorry if this reply is late) Well, seeing as he didn’t elaborate, I might as well do the talking. Basically, the reason why he said that animated movies aren’t for you is because of a video you made a while back discussing whether or not animated films were becoming lazy. I’ve scrolled through the comments on that video and quite a few people were either angry because you were so wrong, or just calling it a bad video in general because someone claimed that you were mostly talking about Kung Fu Panda 4 and not other animated films. For more insight, you said that The Garfield Movie (2024) was ‘Everything wrong with Animated Films’ which seemed harsh, and when you called Inside Out 2 terrible, they said it was blasphemous because they think you have terrible opinions on animation. So yeah, that’s probably why they said that Animated films aren’t for you. Oh, and as for this video, I disagree entirely. I thought that Inside Out 2 was a step up from the first and made things more emotional (although some parts kinda weren’t), specifically the Anxiety Attack scene. And when one of your commenters said that the film could’ve been better if it focused on Riley trying to move back to Minnesota, I personally disagree because the way they displayed Riley’s teen years felt really accurate to me, I was in the exact same spot where they were. Also, I personally believe that not all animated films and sequels need to be original to be good as I say it should follow a specific pattern but with some changes. I know that sounds weird but let me explain. So, if you remember when Cars 2 released back in 2011, it got poor reviews from the public because it was busy, frantic, nonsensical, and lacks heart. And I think it’s because it didn’t use the same formula or plot elements from the original. It went from being a nascar based movie at first, to a random spy movie inspired by James Bond. It didn’t really feel right putting spies in cars film when it’s all about racing. Now, I’m not saying that your commenter was wrong about their idea for Inside Out 2 and believe me, that would have been good, but personally wouldn’t fit when it comes to growing up and becoming familiar with the place that you currently live in, as well as that children don’t move out until they’re 18. So, even though Inside Out 2 rehashed plot elements from the original, it did not take away the magic and charm that it had going and that’s what made it so unique and special to those who went out there and watched it. But all in all, we can all have different opinions just as yours is different to mine.
@@EpicPixel2024 First of all mate I think you are blowing the kfp4 video way out of proportion. Only one person mentioned how the title of the video was bad and I think he's completley wrong for that, for reasons that I explained in that comment section. Others in the comment section aren't getting angry like you're saying. I'm not gonna lie man using the example of Cars 2 to show why sequels can't be different is insane, like literally insane 😂. I promise you, all the really good - great sequels have either expanded on the original and have also not just been the first one again. You may be able to get away with not having one of these if the movie is for example really funny, but that's incredibly rare. All the great sequels (Shrek 2, The Godfather Part 2, Toy Story 2 etc) have done this in some form. You picked Cars 2, which is one of the absolute worst examples you could choose. The quality between something like Inside Out 2 and Toy Story 2 is night and day. Inside Out 2 is terrible but I've explained that in the video.
