Pixar is starting to scare me.
For 15 years, not only have they been both a dominant cinematic juggernaut and Hollywood’s animation darling, they have been a studio that always produced highly original films of tremendous quality. ALWAYS. As in, 100%.
Then, Cars 2 happened. Given their golden history, some could say that it was only a matter of time before Pixar hit a slight miss-step. However, what could have been seen as a one-off double bogey is slowly being amplified due to odd sequel/prequel speculations/confirmations that seem to serve as nothing more than easy cash-grabs. Brave looks to disrupt this unsettling thought, but only time will tell if it will be enough.
Will this beloved animation studio be able to retain their longstanding dignity or will they continue to be pimp-slapped by a circular eared rodent? It’s time to choose: will you wear your lederhosen of loyalty or your pantyhose of pessimism?
With a back catalogue of such pristine quality, it’s easy to believe that Pixar could do no wrong, and for an absurdly long time, they lived up to that ideal. Using their plethora of Oscars as paperweights to their buttloads of cash, Disney’s prize studio struck a magical balance between artistry and mainstream appeal, especially over the last four years. I won’t bother convincing you any further, I’ll just assume you’ve seen either Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up or Toy Story 3. If for some ungodly reason you have not seen any of these masterpieces, do us both a favour: watch ‘em back-to-back.
Seriously. Stop reading this, go hire those movies and watch them right now. I’ll wait…
Now that you’re unquestionably convinced of their greatness, let’s move on.
Doubts arose with the announcement of Cars 2. The original Cars, while still maintaining that Pixar level of class and charm, was one of the studio’s least critically acclaimed films. So choosing to franchise it initially seemed confusing, especially when you have a legion of geeks crying for The Incredibles 2.
Cars 2 has opened to a less-than-decent critical welcoming. It has currently gathered an IMDb average of 6.6/10 and an even lower Metacritic score of 57%, with some critics slamming it for its lack of originality, lack of subtlety and, most worryingly, lack of charm. For a film that bears the Pixar name, this is a big deal.
Though it would be wildly unfair to call Cars 2 a total bomb, the quality of the story never exceeded that of a ‘90s Disney straight-to-video sequel, preferring to bombard the viewer with an abundance of unnecessary cari-car-tures and Mater costume changes in order to increase their toy catalogue. Given how big of a cash-cow the first film was (in terms of merchandising), it makes perfect business sense for Disney to pressure for a sequel with an increased character-count whilst exploiting their star car, Mater.
But the issue isn’t simply “they’re not even trying”. The espionage subplot clearly had a lot of thought behind it, and if they made that the central focus of the sequel, I probably wouldn’t be writing this post. The issue seems more likely to be a lack of dedication.
Perhaps I’m wrong, but it would make a hellovalotta sense if I’m right. For one, Pixar have been riding a quad-year of critical success (I’m referring to those four movies you just watched). Cars 2’s faults (or “lacks”) are likely to be (in part) the result of creative exhaustion. For two, they have a big mousey pimp to please, as is the effects of marketization. Churning out a movie a year is busy work. But to keep those films at “Pixar quality” whilst avoiding getting hit with the pimp cane? It’s nothing short of phenomenal that Pixar has been able to keep it going for so long.
And yet, the future looks worrying. Not only was Cars 2 an unnecessary sequel, but we’ll also be exposed to Monsters University, an unnecessary prequel to Monsters Inc. Don’t get me wrong, I love Sully and Mike Wawtcheowsckeieieie, but just read the synopsis to their 2013 return (or preturn, if you will):
“A look at the relationship between Mike and Sulley during their days at the University of Fear — when they weren’t necessarily the best of friends.”
It sounds like a flashback episode for a ‘90s sitcom. But the real question begging is “why franchise this?” Same answer: merchandising. It’s simple maths, really.
Again, I’m merely speculating, but it’s definitely looking like the same tactics applied to Cars 2.
Tom Hanks didn’t help either. Not only did he blabber some sort of confirmation about the horrible horrible existence of Toy Story 4, the bugger did it twice! As a collective voice, fans of the “perfect” trilogy cried “NOOOOOOOOO!” Pixar’s Blog appeared to be just as confused about the announcements, suggesting that Hanks may be mistaking it for Toy Story Toons. Nevertheless, the thought is in our heads, and considering the sudden appearance of the aforementioned unnecessary expansions, the thought is hard to shake.
But then you’ve got Brave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMGFCmy352M
Conveniently wedge between Cars 2 and Monsters University, Brave looks set to retain Pixar’s initial standard of originality and quality in its 2012 release. This has lead some to ponder Disney’s tactics. Are they planning to let Pixar create the films they want to make on the proviso that they follow up with a rush-job sequel on a year-to-year basis? If so, is that really such a bad thing? Cars 2 may be of low quality, but it isn’t terrible. Perhaps we expect too much from Pixar. Then again, perhaps we’re justified in that expectation.
With all this in mind, you’ll either remain obliviously faithful or reluctantly paranoid over the possible future of Pixar films. For all we know, Monsters University could blow our minds. Then again, Brave could suck more than Cars 2. We don’t know. We can only speculate. Do you think Pixar will remain dignified or become Disney-fied?
Personally, I prefer to wear my pantyhose under my lederhosen.
