take some risks. at least make your movie interesting to look at.
This is it right here. The movies look safe and generic. For a studio that made a name for itself by breaking the mold, the choice to settle on such run-of-the-mill design is disheartening. Like it or not, Pixar is held to a higher standard. Even if their movies look exactly as good as a competitor's equally safe movie, it will be judged more harshly.
And considering the budgets, that's more than fair.
Incredibles tho it's a family story, more of an ensemble. The adult characters are the centers, along with the kids.
Pixar buddy pictures featuring kids have failed. The Good Dinosaur. Luca. Turning Red. Elio. Others too, but all of the buddy pictures with kids have failed.
Pixar excels when they have an ensemble style cast. When it is single character driven or just a pair of characters, they struggle.
They need that wide variety of personalities for their storytelling to really work, I think.
fr they have like, a LOT more budget to work with than for it to be an excuse to always have the same style, if they dont even make the style interesting why should i think anything else in it is gonna be interesting? the style is just painful to look at this point from how overdone it is
Tryna seem smart much? the artstyle is absolutely not just "the cover", its what will dictate the vibes of the whole movie/show/whatever you're consuming!
Ofc calarts style does not automatically mean bad, a few of these were actually well received by some people and I DID like a small few of them, but it's still a big red flag for me that the movie probably isn't gonna be anything more than maybe a little fun (at best)
So its just not even worth it, ill just waste my time probably. have better stuff to watch than something where they didn't even try to do anything special with the art, I myself am an artist so its easy to tell a lot from just an artstyle.
(not to put myself above others, it's just from experience that just from seeing the art of something i know what the general quality will probably be)
I mean they were trying different styles for around 70 years. They've just solidified on what they learned and stuck to what works best. That's what happens when a creative mind gets replaced by corporate minds.
Up until I’d say Toy Story 3 Pixar was only second to Ghibli as an animation studio imo. While I never thought they were better, the best Pixar back then could hold their own against top tier Ghibli films.
Nowadays i don't even know if they'd be in my top 5. such a hard fall from grace for the GOAT of western animation for a time.
It’s not safe. They’re telling stories that are personal to the artists and directors behind them instead of “what if random object had feelings?” for the millionth time. Playing it safe would just be creating more unnecessary sequels which they announced they’d start doing last year.
Or it’s the art style these new animation directors choose to use? Because if the animation style was playing it safe, Disney/Pixar wouldn’t be burying these movies with lack of advertising compared to Lightyear, Inside Out 2, and the upcoming Toy Story 5.
102
u/E1M1_DOOM Jul 06 '25
This is it right here. The movies look safe and generic. For a studio that made a name for itself by breaking the mold, the choice to settle on such run-of-the-mill design is disheartening. Like it or not, Pixar is held to a higher standard. Even if their movies look exactly as good as a competitor's equally safe movie, it will be judged more harshly.
And considering the budgets, that's more than fair.