Pixar is a great example of great movies with toxic or annoying fan base.Ratatouille on the other hand was a masterpiece. I don’t even know how to put it in words
There was one criticism of these Pixar sequels/prequels that I was a bit disappointed you didn't address. Most of them feel more like spin-offs rather than actual followups, as they tend to star a secondary character, often the comic relief, rather than continuing the story of the main character. Cars 2, Monsters University, and Finding Dory are all guilty of this. I'll list my thoughts below, but you don't need to read the whole thing: I know a lot of people claim that Cars 2 was "made to sell toys", but I still think it failed because Mater is not a good leading man, at least not for an hour and a half movie. I confess I never got the hate for the original Cars (I watched it fairly recently and found myself crying quite a bit), but I agree that it was fine on its own and didn't need a sequel. They could have just as easily made an original spy movie and left Mater out completely. Or if they wanted to cash in on the success of his popularity, why not just make more Mater shorts? I actually found some of them fairly funny. Admittedly I don't hate Monsters University as much as you did. It was one of their weaker movies, but I like how it showed Mike and Sulley needing each other, with Mike being better at learning the knowledge of scaring while Sulley is better at executing the scares. Then again you could say it focused a little more on Mike than on Sulley. I can also appreciate the tons of creative monster designs, but unfortunately most of the new side characters weren't all that memorable. One thing that really bugged me though was adding the "you lied to me" thing at the end of the scare games. I feel like that cliche is becoming very overused, especially in kids' movies. Finding Dory is another movie I can at least give credit to for fleshing out Dory's backstory. Finding Nemo never explained how Dory could read or how she would know what a "root beer float" is, so establishing that she was born in captivity and would have been exposed to humans makes some sense in that regard. But once again the side characters were a huge step down. They weren't annoying or anything, but aside from Hank the octopus (septopus?), most of them barely made an impression on me. I saw Finding Nemo in theaters back when I was six and I can still remember the names of all the side characters: Bruce, Crush, Nigel, Mr. Ray, the Tank Gang...they were all such fun and memorable characters. I was soooo disappointed that most of them didn't show up for the sequel, and the ones who did were relegated to cameos. Even Marlin and Nemo had their role downplayed significantly. I haven't seen Incredibles 2 as of the time of writing this, but judging by the trailers, it appears to be going against the entire point of the original. The Incredibles was all about how they work best as a family, but the sequel (judging by the trailers) appears to be more or less "The Elastigirl Movie", as it shows that she's going off to do hero work on her own while Mr. Incredible is relegated to stay at home dad. I understand they were aiming for a "female empowerment message", but like many female reboots coming out these days, I ask the question "why not create an original female character?" If Inside Out is any indication, Pixar is fully capable of creating unique female protagonists. So why not give us a brand new action movie with a kickass leading lady? I would have loved to see that. Or if they wanted "more representation", why not give us a Frozone spinoff? It would have made way more sense. Even Toy Story 4 was guilty of this to some extent. While they appeared to be keeping the focus on Woody, almost all the attention was on "Hey look, we brought Bo Peep back!", and retooling her into a "strong independent woman"...while completely shoving Jessie, who actually _was_ a strong female character, into the background. In fact most of the characters we've come to know and love from the first three movies are shoved into the van for most of the story to make room for all these new characters, and the returning characters who do contribute to the plot feel dumbed down or out of character. Why would Bonnie ignore Woody when she was so passionate about him in Toy Story 3? Why would Woody abandon the rest of the toys, who he more or less treats as family, for some girl he hasn't seen in years who now acts completely different from the girl he fell in love with? Why does the movie put so much focus on Woody and Bo's relationship when the Toy Story movies were never really about romance? And maybe this is me reading too deeply into this, but for a movie focused on romance, Toy Story 4 has some pretty questionable messages about romantic relationships if you think about it. Woody wanting to be there for one certain kid who loves and cares about him is presented as in the wrong while Bo wanting to go around being a "lost toy" and not really caring about the kids is presented as in the right. If we applied that to real world relationships, it sounds a lot like it's saying stable monogamy is bad and sleeping around with no emotional connection is good. I doubt kids will pick on that, but still, it doesn't exactly look good for your "female empowerment" message when your "strong female character" comes across as a slut. As much as I can appreciate the beautiful animation, there are so many issues I have with Toy Story 4 that I pretend it's non-canon. So yeah, those were my thoughts. While I agree that Pixar can still turn out a good product here and there, it really sucks that they keep falling into this trap of giving side characters their own movies and shoving most of the original cast into the background to make room for lackluster new characters. Most of these movies aren't offensive to the originals or anything (except maybe Toy Story 4 being a complete slap in the face to Toy Story 3's beautiful emotional ending), but hope they don't continue down this path in the future. I really don't want to end up with "Inside Out 2: Bing Bong is still alive somehow". Pixar, if you're reading this, please DO NOT make that into a real movie.
I'd like to say I think maybe Dory only mentioned 'root beer float' as just a guess next to 'go to the back of the throat' or mishearing of what the whale is saying. I doubt she'd know what it is.
I personally thought Monsters University was a great prequel and really like how it subverted the standard tropes and messages of the college graduation movie, but over all I agree with all of your points.
I agree with most of your perspectives in the video, but I personally feel like Monsters University is a good prequel to Monsters Inc, as it focuses on the second of the protagonists throughout, leading to Mike feeling like even more of a developed character than the first movie. The third act is also usually seen as much better than the rest of the movie, with it’s twist of Mike not being good enough and failing his dreams.
I think I actually like the Pixar shorts more than most of the full length movies. That Toy Story one about the fast food toy support group especially.
Wow. This was really on point right down to the dozens of -shameless and unoriginal lazy spinoffs- "microwaveable dinners". This video deserves more views.
As somebody who likes all the Pixar sequels (yes, that includes Cars 2. I am not sorry), I can't help but agree with your points here. Back in the '90s and 2000's, Pixar would churn out masterpiece after masterpiece. These days, we get a bunch of movies that are either just good or decent, with the occasional masterpiece thrown in (Soul, Inside Out, Coco), and while that doesn't inherently sound like a bad thing, you can't help but feel as if they've lost their magic a bit. This video was an incredible satisfying watch. Thank you, good sir! :D
Skinner’s like Bob Iger with the Disney remakes, wreck it Ralph 2, toy story 4 and frozen 2 and we kept “eating” them because they had the Disney tittle and Walt Disney’s imagine just like the Pixar stuff said here
@@a.t.m873 To be honest, some of the Disney remakes aren't that bad in my opinion, aside from Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, and the 1990s Jungle Book movie that's not the direct-to-video movie. The movies I enjoyed were Mowgli's Story, Maleficent (and it's sequel), the Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast, Christopher Robin, Dumbo, Aladdin, and the Lion King. To me, I think what sealed their fate, was that Mulan was the one that ruined it's chances. The remakes of Alice and Cinderella felt less like the characters we know in an alternate timeline, and more like poorly rewritten versions made for a bad fan-fiction. And Mulan was the worst example of all. Instead of being respectful of the idea that Mulan serves her country by being secret strategist like in the Ballad, and China never understood that this is what was important about the original movie back then. It's ironic and hypocritical, when China argued itself over the details, be it her family, or who she fights against. What they didn't realize, is that the original Disney adaptation was closer to Mulan's character: whereas the remake version is a Mary-Sue who has super speed and strength and took a position in power, the original Disney adaptation says otherwise; that she's resourceful and doesn't need to rule the Kingdom, because saving her country was a big enough reward. After those three adaptations failed to understand those characters, I have no hopes for any more remakes, because they did this to themselves, especially when the company supported unethical motives.
Speaking of Pixar, did you know that John Lasseter left Pixar and moved to Skydance Animation due to allegations of workplace sexual misconduct. Lee Unkrich(the co-director of Toy Story 2, Monsters, Inc. and Finding Nemo and the director of Toy Story 3 and Coco) also left Pixar in February 2019 to spend time with his family.
I don't think Brave was as bad as people say it is; it probably would have been my favorite princess movie if I'd seen it as a kid (I went through a big Celtic mythology phase). Actually I don't know why more people don't like it. Its gorgeous, the character designs are unique (you have to admit current Pixar faces are all pretty generic), the animation is well-done, especially with the hair, and the cast is all pretty good, plus I found the mother-daughter dynamic very relatable.
some of it boils down to preference. I never hated brave but i thought it was kind of just "okay". I watched it maybe twice and kind of just moved on. Again, i wouldn't call it BAD, its just now what i look for in a story, and i feel like Brave hit that note with a lot of people. The story was okay, but something about it missed a few marks (ie, they could have told the same story, but changed or added something to make it more interesting for people, but i'm not sure what those things would be). Like i play games a lot, and some of the games i like get bad reception, but they do things i PERSONALLY like, so there's no shame in liking them. The world doesn't need to love the things you like if you have a good time with them. Kinda like how you don't get why they don't like it, they have a thing where they can't like it. Its like trying to convince someone a food they don't like is good. If you hate peas, you hate peas.
Four words: Predictable and generic story. I literally called the twist of Mordu being the prince in the queen’s story the instant it was brought up, so when Merida realized this, I was less, ‘Oh, snap! I didn’t see that coming!’ and more, ‘Oh, what took you so long?’.
@@TF2Fan101 It’s only generic if you watched a dozen of movies. I think people worked these movies shouldn’t aim to please the experience of 30 year old Pixar adults. If you want more subversive material, maybe it’s time to graduate from Pixar movies.
Reaction to Pixar sequels is a real-life example of the phrase “no pressure”. There’s this pedigree Pixar has to go beyond good every single time. That’s not always gonna happen. Even if you didn’t like the sequels, they’re a bump in the road at best.
For me, I really loved what Monsters University did for Mike. It actually made me appreciate him more as a character, since it gives an understandable reason for why he acts the way he does in the first movie. He’s so determined to be the best of the best, so dedicated to making his mark on the scare floor… that he often overlooks that he’s capable of much more than what he thinks he’ll accomplish in his desired career. In Monsters University, I found it beautiful that he accepts himself as someone who can’t be a true scarer… but can still use his skills to work in similar fields. In Monsters Inc., he discovers how much better off he is at making children laugh rather than someone who helps scare them. He realizes how wrong the system of Monsters Inc. was, and finally uses his gifts for the betterment of others. 😊❤️ It sort of reminds me what the barbershop guy said in Soul: sometimes, we may not always get what we want. But our talents and skills can be used in ways that are better than we can imagine.
Ratatouille was a Pixar Masterpiece from start to finish!! It’s so sad that Pixar became the next Disney animation who wanted to capitalize on the successes of the originals. People wanted the Incredibles to have a sequel and make it happen. And has anyone ever heard about the phrase “Be careful what you wish for”? This is exactly what happens if you wished upon a star specifically for a Disney sequel or even a Pixar Sequel to happen! People wanted a great mouse detective sequel to happen and they’ve wished for it, and you have to understand if Disney makes a great mouse detective sequel or two of them, then it’s not going to be worth the wait. Pixar’s Incredibles 2 wasn’t worth the wait for anyone who loved the original. I loved the incredibles, but i never asked for a sequel to begin with.
Onward was not on this list and that makes me happy. That one was amazing and the story/lesson it teaches is something i think everyone needs to hear at least once.
I know people won't think what I'm saying is valid, but maybe we have a lesson to learn here too: Don't put people on pedestals. Because if you do, if they screw up even ONCE, you will feel tremendous disappointment. Maybe we hold companies like Pixar or Disney to too high standards. Maybe we should have moderate or fairly high expectations.
Watching this video 2 years later it would seem that Pixar has not learned anything. Toy Story 5 was just announced and only a year after the failed spin off Lightyear. At this point we should just accept that they're not getting any better and that there "golden age" has come and gone.
What I didn't like about Toy Story 4 was that Forky felt like those babies you see in those annoying as heck babysitting episodes. I always hated babysitting episodes in a TV show and I just found it annoying here. It wasn't that much of the movie to be fair, but I just never cared for it. I personally enjoyed Incredibles 2 but found Finding Dory to sink by the last third act, not to mention I hate what happened to the tank gang there.
How many people do you know who think Toy Story 3 was the start of Pixar's downfall? Most people I talk to think it's a masterpiece and one of Pixar's best. I'm not a fan of Toy Story 3 at all, but I generally don't associate it with the other films people consider to be lesser quality.
I actually really love Toy Story 3 and regard it as the true ending, though that might be because I take so many issues with Toy Story 4 that I pretend it's non-canon.
from what i’ve seen, there are chunks of people that enjoy toy story 3 (either over, just as much, or not as much as the first two or the second movie), are mixed on the movie, or just outright dislike/hate it. it’s genuinely one of the most divisive movies i’ve ever seen, not just from pixar but movies in general.
Oh, this is definitely me when I watched one of their recent movies. They're so bland now - and this was before I found out John was awful. But the worst one was Incredibles II: or, "How is this the same universe?" O.K., so, coming back to this vid 2 years later and - 1. The Cars movies are the riskiest thing in their filmography now. 2. Cars on the Road, just - Cars on the Road *sucks.* 3. Their biggest upcoming original movie is basically "Osmosis Jones 3D Renders: The Movie."
Four years later: - Onward bombed due to COVID - most of their original movies were strapped onto Disney+ - they had another cash in with lightyear. It bombed - Elemental barely made money back if any - Inside Out 2 is about to release, with Toy Story 5 on the way - Pixar learned nothing
A much more interesting story line would've been Bob having to learn how to actually control his powers thus causing him to go deep into his own personal life and traumas as he over comes his reckless behavior to cause damage will rescuing others
@@kittykittybangbang9367 1. That's really just one thing you mentioned 2. I'm mainly referring to how the characters act, it's very in line with gen alpha or even gen z and can be quite obnoxious then again, I guess it's not specific to one era and this could have taken place anytime, I just see it more commonly today. so maybe the better phrasing would have been "everything I hate about culture", but still, not a compliment
With all old Pixar animators who were there since the 1980s to 1990s, are started to retired or die, and we basically needed a new generation of animators to carry the torch. It's like Disney did the same thing after the death of Walt Disney. Where the Nine Old Men were either moving to CalArts or retired or died, many young animators stepped in and carry on the legacy where they left off, and it paid off well. With generation Z (Including me) are graduating college or whatever, that's where we potentially come in and created the amazing movies.
While, I don’t completely agree with your opinions on all the Pixar sequels, I actually thought Toy Story 3, Finding Dory, and Incredibles 2, were fantastic, I’m not gonna act like I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Monsters University could never really work because the most memorable college films usually center around drinking and sex...two things you can't have in a Pixar movie.
Retro rant reviews made the point that Ratatouille, was Pixar reflacting on Disney during its run under Ezner with hanging on Walts image and the Frozen tv diners are the direct to dvd sequels The buring of the tv diners was directly reflacting on Lasseter shuting down the productions and studio were the sequels for Disney movies were made The irony is that Pixar cus of the deal with Disney that they had to make sequels and prequels of there own movies, they became the villain they tried to defeate And when Lasseter finally stepped away Pixar finally moved on to bigger better movies, ratatouille funny enough openly adressed how much woman barely had any say in Pixar if brave is any proof of that
While I love Toy Story 2 & 3 and the only Pixar films I actively dislike are Cars 2 and Good Dinosaur it's hard to deny a lot of their sequels lack a lot of the energy their original works have (weirdly Cars 3 was my favourite Pixar sequel made after Toy Story 3). I heard a rumour that Disney agreed to produce Ratatouille, WALL-E and Up on the condition Pixar make more sequels, starting with Toy Story 3 and Cars 2, and while IDK if that's true a lot of the sequels do feel like obligations mainly done to finance the projects they actually want to make. To pull from examples that came out after this video, I thought Soul, Luca and Turning Red were all really terrific while Lightyear mostly felt like an uneven attempt to once again return to the Toy Story well. Elemental looks mediocre but I can at least respect it for not being tied to a pre-existing ip, as opposed to the upcoming Inside Out 2 which I could honestly see being much better but still feels like we're going back to a story that didn't need a follow-up. Big Joel made a nice lil video detailing his reasons why he didn't want any more Pixar sequels and, while I can see the potential in something like an Incredibles 3 or Coco 2, it's hard to deny that sometimes you should leave a good story you already told alone.
2 years after this video was posted, I can say Onward was pretty good but Soul was meh. I had heartfelt emotions with Onward, but I didn't feel anything when I watched Soul and while I have chosen to watch Onward multiple times, I don't feel the need to experience Soul again which sucks because it involved POC who don't get enough representation in Disney movies.
literally pixar could make a film about a drug addict that beats up kid's and commits acts of terrorism and the movie tried to paint him as a hero and portray anyone who calls him out as in the wrong and people would call it the 'best film evah!'
No offense dude, but I do like most of these sequels. Granted they aren’t as iconic as their predecessors but I did had a good time watching these Pixar sequels and the animation is the perfect example on how advanced they are compared to the 2000s. As of now, I think Pixar is in a much better place since John Lassester was departed. Soul and Turning Red are absolutely gems and Inside Out 2 seems to be fantastic. But honestly with your take, I respectfully disagree.
I personally adore Toy Story 4 as the epilogue that fully wraps up Woody’s arc from the first film and more or less brings the series back to its more humble simple roots but with how much Woody has grown over the years and ending it off with a nice goodbye and to me a better send off for Woody then 3. But like you said, if you don’t like it, I completely get that. It’s not gonna be for everyone especially since it had the task of trying to follow up on 3. Something that you are either gonna think succeeded at or didn’t and I’m totally fine with it.
In all reality, most people dont know the difference between animation studios. The pnly people who do, are film nerds, animation nerds, and Disney adults. Because Pixar has become a generic name for all CGI movies. Most people think all CGI movies are Pixar. People think Shrek, Encanto, Super Mario, Minions, Spiderman, The Lego Movie, etc, are all Pixar. When in reality they're all made by different studios. But its sorta like if you want to buy a shirt, most people don't know the difference between Gildan, Hanes, Fruit of the Loom, etc, or if there is any difference at all. And they don't care either. To 99% of people, a shirt is a shirt. As long as it fits, it's comfortable, and it's the color you want, that's all that matters. So when you talk about the decline of Pixar, yes, your audience will understand, but the vast majority of people won't. Because they'll say "No, Puss In Boots was really good." Not realizing it's not a Pixar film.
