Commenting on the critics with Simon Columb…
Scott Mendelson, writer for The Huffington Post, writes the following:
“Is Pixar as we know it finished? Has a fifteen-year run of uniformly fine cartoons given way to an act two filled with half-hearted misses and needless sequels? It’s a somewhat sensationalistic argument, but the timing is not a little disconcerting. Andrew Stanton, fresh off the epic financial failure that is John Carter (which in many ways can be considered a Pixar live-action venture), is now back at Pixar to helm the sequel to one of his animated hits [Finding Nemo], a sequel that arguably no one was asking for.”
Read the full article here.
It truly is devastating that so many of Pixar’s properties are now simply turning into sequel opportunities. One of the best, credible, elements of Pixar was how they could – in-house – create unique, unestablished properties. In a time whereby sequels, reboots and established brands fuel studios, Pixar stood against that. Films like Battleship and Transformers are made as they have a market, ready and waiting, to see the film. The fourth installments, that often destroy the credibility of a film series – Die Hard 4.0, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull or Rambo – again, are made because there is an audience waiting to watch ‘what happens next’. The franchise is sometimes irreversibly changed and is mocked for the out-of-place ‘fourth’ installment. But, this is how Hollywood works. If there is a market, then there is money. So, its only good business to cater to that market at whatever the cost.
Pixar on the other hand created properties which were innovative and new. Wall-E, Up and Finding Nemo all had no property established beforehand. They were films which, through sheer skillful storytelling, everyone became invested and deeply passionate about the characters. So much so, that kids wanted the toys and adults were happy to part with their money to buy the DVD.
On the slate for the future, we have Monsters University and Finding Nemo 2. The latter is a film that truly belonged on its own. Indeed Cars 2 was a huge critical flop – it was one the worst films of the year in my opinion. To fall from grace so majestically – Toy Story 3 to Cars-and-gadgets ridiculous-moral-message-Cars 2, is simply tragic. The worry is what this means.
There was a time whereby I would watch every Pixar film at the cinema. Yes, I paid for Cars 2, and that was because of the flawless track record that Pixar had up until that point. I will seek out Brave when it gets the August release in the UK but if – and according to reviews, it will – fail to impress me, then maybe I won’t bother with the next film. I guess I will see those sequels out of respect… but Pixar may become much more a run-of-the-mill, kids studio rather than the perfect, profound and deeply-personal film studio that was truly established between 1995 and 2010. Like the picture, the Mouse House money-making schemes may be eating away the artistic credibility of the studio.
Originally published July 22, 2012. Updated April 10, 2018.
