Phroobar
Well-Known Member
I don't know if I'd trust cinemascore rating on any Pixar movie. Lightyear they gave an A- and Good Dinosaur an A.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Elemental (Pixar - June 2023)
- Thread starter DCBaker
- Start date
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
“At least we’re not WBD” has been a common refrain for Disney defenders over the last year but that’s not exactly the own you think it is.
Slpy3270
Well-Known Member
The thing is the industry is completely flying blind and nobody seems to have an idea on how to deal with the incoming demise of linear TV and theatrical. Sure Paramount is likely to score big with M:I and Transformers but that means little when Paramount's core business, cable networks, is bleeding rapidly and management is pouring billions into Paramount+ when there's no sign to profitability. Just recently their stock fell ~30% in one day when they announced they were cutting the dividend to fund the service (oh, and they've been stripping the company down for parts so CBS can pay for their new NFL contract)?
Universal seems to have the right idea with not having oversized budgets and a neat theme parks division, but even they aren't confident in Peacock offsetting their declining linear businesses since they keep losing hundreds of millions on it. They're also set to lose millions of Xfinity subscribers next week when that free offer is up and it's unknown how many of them will resubscribe. They keep beefing up their sports portfolio but that may only accelerate the losses.
Sony's strategy of staying out of the streaming wars is paying off handsomely, but how long will that strategy last when Spider-Man inevitably wears off? Those film rights are the only real valuable asset Sony has (they used to have movie merch rights as well but they gave them back to Marvel so they could keep 100% of the film grosses, which in hindsight was probably a crappy deal). Ghostbusters and Jumanji may bring in dough but nowhere near what Spidey makes. Sony may have to say sayonara to their film unit if the worst-case scenario comes to pass.
The reason Disney is better positioned than all of them is only because their IPs and networks make so much money that they can swallow $100m losses in ways the others can't. The question is, if streaming ends up never making money, when is that no longer the case?
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
I’ve missed a handful of Pixar titles (mostly the sequels) but Elemental is pretty solidly in the bottom two-three for me. Lower-tier Pixar at any rate.
Positives: fire/water character designs, looked spectacular in 3D, hand holding is the one standout scene
Indifferent: story beats were predictably set up, didn’t do much with air or earth groups
Bad: choppy storytelling, especially the insertion of flashbacks and the jump in the story to the sports arena (a scene that makes no emotional sense), not many laughs for a comedy, and never bought Wade as a romantic partner
The rules of physical contact are vague in a way that feels like sloppy writing. Crazy to see that in a Pixar film.
Audience I saw it with seemed indifferent. The Up short was more amusing than Elemental but felt incomplete.
Positives: fire/water character designs, looked spectacular in 3D, hand holding is the one standout scene
Indifferent: story beats were predictably set up, didn’t do much with air or earth groups
Bad: choppy storytelling, especially the insertion of flashbacks and the jump in the story to the sports arena (a scene that makes no emotional sense), not many laughs for a comedy, and never bought Wade as a romantic partner
The rules of physical contact are vague in a way that feels like sloppy writing. Crazy to see that in a Pixar film.
Audience I saw it with seemed indifferent. The Up short was more amusing than Elemental but felt incomplete.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Pixar's weakest box office opening ever. The Disney+ curse they created for themselves is real, it would seem. 
screenrant.com
Elemental's Box Office Is One Of Pixar's Lowest Debut In 3 Decades Since Toy Story
Pixar's Elemental isn't doing so hot.
screenrant.com
Indy_UK
Well-Known Member
Pixar's weakest box office opening ever. The Disney+ curse they created for themselves is real, it would seem.
Elemental's Box Office Is One Of Pixar's Lowest Debut In 3 Decades Since Toy Story
Pixar's Elemental isn't doing so hot.
Are they ever going to stop and think they may need to change how things are done?
The way Pixar are going, I feel that that they are driving themselves into the ground and the audience will move on from them forever.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Agree with all of this.
We went to see Elemental today (in 3D even - so nobody can argue we weren't rooting for it) and I have to say, I went in wanting to like it and walked out wishing it had been a better movie than it ended up being.
The design and animation was of course, beautiful - everything you expect from a Pixar movie in that regard.
Everything else?
Meh.
MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD
While I think they did a pretty solid job with Ember's character and her family, Wade and his ilk felt like a weird bad parody. Honestly, the way his side of the love story played out, I wouldn't be surprised if his character went through a similar "love" story with someone else every other week. He came across as kind of a love bomber.
A walking body of water with the apparent depth of a puddle.
I understand they were playing up the opposites and all of that but how they demonstrate him "connecting" with others like in the stadium felt cringy and forced.
The idea that they went from meeting in bad circumstances as adversaries to "true love" in less than a week was also stretching the boundaries of credibility.
How the boss went from anoyed and difficult to suddenly a buddy helping out with the underwater scene? That also didn't track unless Wade really just uses empathy to manipulate others.
Those are just a few examples.
The various messages being sent also seemed a little bit heavy-handed, to me, too.
They weren't bad messages but more and more, Disney's and Pixar's movies seem to be more about the message than the entertainment and if I wanted to watch an after school special, I'd start watching broadcast TV again - not trekking out to a theater.
Unlike Strange World that I feel would have needed a significant re-write to have saved, this one feels like it could have been a great movie if it had gone through a tougher internal review process.
That what saved Wade in the end was his most melodramatic eye-rolling trait made it feel like that whole point about him and his "people" was forced in there just to have that be able to happen in the end.
They could have gone with how steam - a natural result of fire and water - isn't the end for either of them and how it cooled her without killing her because her "flame" was too strong to be extinguished that way (great metaphor to address her coming to terms with her spirit and individuality while taming her temper) while also showing him he could be more resilient (the heat doesn't kill him but transforms him) and not such a pushover.
Disney/Pixar being all about the message these days, it could have been a solid message about the need for both yin and yang and how everything is stronger with both.
The big message of the film was diversity and finding beauty in what makes us different, right? Wouldn't a melting-pot solution like that have driven that message home?
Instead, they went with the solution being that he needed to cry some more.
It didn't feel earned.
I felt let down, not because it was an awful movie but because it felt like it could have been a great movie if - I don't know?
Someone else directed?
That's probably too harsh so I'd say, if someone or a group of someone's with some distance was providing the brutal internal critiquing that Pixar was once legendary for putting all their movies through before letting the public see them.
It's feeling like a lot of these newer movies haven't been getting that kind of love to me.
The ending was emotional but like Wade's ability to "connect", it felt more like shallow manipulation than what I'd at one time come to expect from Pixar movies.
Pete Doctor is already subtly blaming how audiences have been "trained" to watch Pixar on Disney+. I think that's completely the wrong takeaway. Every movie finds it's way on to some streaming service sooner than later now days.
That's not why people with kids are taking them to other animated movies and avoiding Pixar and Disney's latest releases.
We went to see it in a theater on opening weekend. I wouldn't recommend anyone else spend money to see it that way and D+ grooming has nothing to do with why.
If anyone were to ask me, I'd say if you haven't seen Across the Spiderverse yet, go spend your money on that one - it deserves it.
Wait until you can see this one for "free".
Last edited:
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Why spend $55 (not including snack bar) to take the family of four to see a $200 Million Pixar movie in theaters when you can see it for $8 in front of your own 65 inch 4K screen that every middle class home now has?
What a horrible mess they've created for themselves. It will be fun to watch them try and get themselves out of it. Slashing campus payrolls and production budgets would seem to be a good place to start.
Indy_UK
Well-Known Member
I’m planning to take my son to see the movie on Tuesday or Wednesday as we can see it cheap ($9) for both and it gets us out of the house for a couple of hours but are people really not going to see it at the cinema because they know it will be on Disney+ within 6 weeks?
Could it be because kids are wanting to see bigger IP like Mario and Spider-Man atm? I’m sure that if it was Frozen 3 or Toy Story 5 (dear god, think of something new) people wouldn’t be taking about disastrous earnings
Could it be because kids are wanting to see bigger IP like Mario and Spider-Man atm? I’m sure that if it was Frozen 3 or Toy Story 5 (dear god, think of something new) people wouldn’t be taking about disastrous earnings
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I don't think that argument even has to be made.
If streaming weren't a thing, I'd be saying to wait to Red Box it.
We continue to go because the slate of animated movies is few and far between and we enjoy the disconnect from the outside world that watching something at home lacks.
We've seen everything Disney and Pixar has put out in theater since my son was born 11 years ago. (he slept quietly through Brave in his carrier while his mom and I watched) Onward is the last one from either studio that we've seen in theater that wasn't a disappointment and, If I'm being honest, I wouldn't say that one was great, either.
As for D+, we loved Luca. I liked Soul but he thought it was boring and I completely understand why. If I weren't closer to the protaganast's age, I probably wouldn't have liked it, either. I feel like Turing Red was saved a bad theatrical release by being put on Disney+ to shield it since I don't think they were ever going to get enough of the 25-35 female crowd showing up to compensate for the family audiences that would have avoided it.*
Instead, they can lament how good it might have done without having to answer for how it probably would have done.
They just don't seem to have it like they used to and others are stepping up to fill the space.
Heck, I love the Tom Holland Spiderman movies but even Sony, who'd been putting out stinkers before striking a deal for the MCU made what is in my opinion, one of the best super hero movies of all time with Into the Spiderverse only to top it with the sequel.
It's inventive and creative and touching in real ways that feel earned rather than contrived - everything I used to expect from Pixar.
Disney+ didn't cause that.
*as a reminder for everyone who loved it, that one doesn't even show up on kid's accounts on D+ which seems like a pretty strong admission from Disney about the audience they felt it was made for.
Last edited:
This is sad! I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I blame the pandemic and Bob Chapek for this!Pixar's weakest box office opening ever. The Disney+ curse they created for themselves is real, it would seem.
Elemental's Box Office Is One Of Pixar's Lowest Debut In 3 Decades Since Toy Story
Pixar's Elemental isn't doing so hot.
And I know, Pixar will be fine.
Last edited:
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Because the movie looks awesome and you want the event experience?
Because you're excited to see it and have waited so long already and don't want to wait longer?
Because the movie seems worth it?
Despite the sometimes unwelcome forms of human interaction it produces, we still love going to movies.*
Across the Spiderverse was a recent no-regret-opneing-weekend viewing and we'll probably go see it one more time before picking it up on bluray and digital. My son asked about seeing it in D-Box.
Being on D+ in a few months wouldn't change that.
We saw the Mario movie twice and now own the 4k of it.
This one?
Maybe we'll give it another chance on D+ but we wouldn't otherwise be buying it to add to our collection if it weren't on D+.
*people on their phones, people talking to each other, people with small bladders - it's all annoying but to me, it's more than made up for by that feeling of loving a movie and being in a room full of people loving it with you. I don't know - maybe it's some weird pheromone thing but I walk out feeling like it's been a sort of shared experience. This one, people just quietly got up and shuffled out of. We ended up being the only unes who even stayed until the end of the credits and this was for a showing where people payed more for it than a normal screening.
Last edited:
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
Coco was amazing and universal.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
Disney+ didn't doom Doctor Strange or The Way of Water.Pixar's weakest box office opening ever. The Disney+ curse they created for themselves is real, it would seem.
This isn't a Disney+ curse, this is a "making sucky movies" curse.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
Agreed with everything you said but especially your comments about the arena scene.
I was trying to figure out why they had Ember approach the boss lady at a sporting event. At best, it’s an awkward situation if you’re trying to create sympathy for her character. Seems like most people would find that annoying, to be asked about work while attending an entertainment event outside business hours. Is it just so they can show Wade “connecting” with the crowd? If so, there have to be a hundred better ways to show he’s a better communicator than she is.
It’s the kind of scene you’d expect from a lesser animation studio because logically, emotionally it doesn’t make sense. And there’s no genuine pay off to having them meet the boss lady in this context.
Wade’s character has a similar underdeveloped B-movie quality. They gave him no real personality except for being an overly sensitive guy who’s also a too-earnest positivity coach. It’s like they took the soft millennial guy stereotypes and rolled them into this shape-shifting blob character. The romance just didn’t work for me because of his half.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
not yet
it's mostly this... BUT part of the issue is that films make slightly less now than they did pre-pandemic. consumer interest and market dynamics have just changed due to streaming. Disney's main issue is mediocre product quality and brand fatigue/disillusionment... but for the market as a whole, theatres aren't what they were in 2018–2019.. nothing really is
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Agree with all of this.
We went to see Elemental today (in 3D even - so nobody can argue we weren't rooting for it) and I have to say, I went in wanting to like it and walked out wishing it had been a better movie than it ended up being.
The design and animation was of course, beautiful.
Everything else?
Meh.
While I think they did a pretty solid job with Ember's character and her family, Wade and his ilk felt like a weird bad parody. Honestly, the way his side of the love story played out, I wouldn't be surprised if his character went through a similar "love" story with someone else every other week. He came across as kind of a love bomber.
A walking body of water with the apparent depth of a puddle.
I understand they were playing up the opposites and all of that but how they demonstrate him "connecting" with others like in the stadium felt cringy and forced.
The idea that they went from meeting in bad circumstances to "true love" in less than a week was also stretching the boundaries of credibility.
How the boss went from difficult to suddenly a buddy? That also didn't track unless Wade really just uses empathy to manipulate others.
Those are just examples.
The various messages being sent also seemed a little bit heavy-handed, to me, too.
They weren't bad messages but more and more, Disney's and Pixar's movies seem to be more about the message than the entertainment and if I wanted to watch an after school special, I'd start watching broadcast TV again - not trekking out to a theater.
Unlike Strange World that I feel would have needed a significant re-write to have saved, this one feels like it could have been a great movie if it had gone through a tougher internal review process.
That what saved Wade in the end was his most melodramatic eye-rolling trait made it feel like that whole point about him and his "people" was forced in there just to have that be able to happen in the end.
They could have gone with how steam - a natural result of fire and water - isn't the end for either of them and how it cooled her without killing her because her "flame" was too strong to be extinguished that way (great metaphor to address her coming to terms with her spirit and individuality while taming her temper) while also showing him he could be more resilient (the heat doesn't kill him but transforms him) and not such a pushover. Them being all about messages, it could have been a solid message about the need for both yin and yang and how everything is stronger with both.
The big message of the film was diversity and finding beauty in what makes us different, right? Wouldn't a melting-pot solution like that have driven that message home?
Instead, they went with the solution being that he needed to cry some more.
It didn't feel earned.
I felt let down, not because it was an awful movie but because it felt like it could have been a great movie if - I don't know?
Someone else directed?
That's probably too harsh so I'd say, if someone or a group of someone's with some distance was providing the brutal internal critiquing that Pixar was once legendary for putting all their movies through before letting the public see them.
It's feeling like a lot of these newer movies haven't been getting that kind of love to me.
The ending was emotional but like Wade's ability to "connect", it felt more like shallow manipulation than what I'd at one time come to expect from Pixar movies.
Pete Doctor is already subtly blaming how audiences have been "trained" to watch Pixar on Disney+. I think that's completely the wrong takeaway. Every movie finds it's way on to some streaming service sooner than later now days.
That's not why people with kids are taking them to other animated movies and avoiding Pixar and Disney's latest releases.
We went to see it in a theater on opening weekend. I wouldn't recommend anyone else spend money to see it that way and D+ grooming has nothing to do with why.
If anyone were to ask me, I'd say if you haven't seen Across the Spiderverse yet, go spend your money on that one - it deserves it.
Wait until you can see this one for "free".
I'd preface this with a spoiler warning ^^^
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I don't think a project being personal to a director is bad.
It can certainly add a degree of authenticity.
I think the problem is if it becomes an auteur-like project where others don't come in with a critical eye.
That's what feels like has been lacking recently to me.