mf1972
Well-Known Member
to me, these movies were just ok. maybe watch again sometime. overall they reminded me when disney used to release direct to video sequels back in the 90’s vs a theatrical release.
-
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
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Looking at the reviews, it does seem that after this and Lightyear Pixar really does need to look at what has changed regarding the creative process from their earlier successes. Amongst other reasons for the film underperforming, I do think Pixar's brand has always been as the more sophisticated US animation studio in terms of storytelling and that needs to be part of the appeal. When a film like this comes out and the consensus is that it is just ok, it becomes a far harder sell than the known quantity of a franchise. The studio is a bit of a victim of its own success in that regard, as "lesser Pixar" is now a phrase people throw around when the films don't quite hit the mark of the studio's best work. I don't think even "lesser Disney" is as much of a thing as "lesser Pixar"!
On that front, I don't think the issue is at all that they need to start telling simpler stories of heroes and villains: that was never their brand. From the discussion on here, I think a lot of people would be rolling their eyes at films like Ratatouille, Wall-E, and Inside Out as being completely unrelatable to the average moviegoer if Pixar released them today. They just need to get back to great storytelling, which is admittedly easier said than done.
Also think post-Luck we can drop the idea that Lasseter was the magic ingredient.
Finally, I agree with those that think there does need to be some re-training of audiences to see a film at the cinema by lengthening the time it takes to come on Disney+. It's not the only (or even necessarily the primary reason) this and really all post-pandemic Disney and Pixar animated films have struggled at the box office, but I think it is part of it. It's kind of the big risk of having a Disney-branded streaming service for all your Disney content: how do you convince people to essentially pay twice for the same Disney content by also seeing it at the cinema? The only way I can think is making it more akin to seeing the film then buying the VHS/DVD/Blu-ray months later.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Yeah…we saw onward in the theater and it has a ton of heart…and popular voices
It got a raw deal
Turning red may have done ok
TP2000
Well-Known Member
What a difference a week makes.
Six days ago Variety was going on record saying that Elemental was "bracing for disaster" as it was forecast to only get $35 Million in domestic box office for it's opening weekend in the good 'ol USA.
"Both of the mega-budgeted tentpoles are tracking for lackluster starts, with “The Flash,” starring Ezra Miller as the title DC superhero, targeting $70 million and “Elemental,” an animated adventure about opposites who attract, aiming to collect just $35 million.
In regards to “Elemental,” the family friendly film is bracing for disaster. Those projected ticket sales are rivaling 2015’s “The Good Dinosaur” ($39 million) and 2020’s “Onward” ($39 million) as the worst starts in Pixar’s modern history. The animation empire has been struggling since the pandemic, when several of its titles were sent directly to Disney+ and possibly trained family audiences to watch its movies at home. The studio took “Elemental” to the Cannes Film Festival to amplify the point (to all the youngsters sunning themselves on the French Riviera?) that Pixar is again making movies for the big screen."
The already disastrous and severely downgraded goal of $35 Million domestic wasn't achieved. Not even $30 Million.
Elemental's grand total for US box office as of Sunday night once the last multiplex in Hawaii closed...
$29,602,429
Maybe we should have waited a few more hours to get the box office from Guam and American Samoa?
variety.com
Six days ago Variety was going on record saying that Elemental was "bracing for disaster" as it was forecast to only get $35 Million in domestic box office for it's opening weekend in the good 'ol USA.
"Both of the mega-budgeted tentpoles are tracking for lackluster starts, with “The Flash,” starring Ezra Miller as the title DC superhero, targeting $70 million and “Elemental,” an animated adventure about opposites who attract, aiming to collect just $35 million.
In regards to “Elemental,” the family friendly film is bracing for disaster. Those projected ticket sales are rivaling 2015’s “The Good Dinosaur” ($39 million) and 2020’s “Onward” ($39 million) as the worst starts in Pixar’s modern history. The animation empire has been struggling since the pandemic, when several of its titles were sent directly to Disney+ and possibly trained family audiences to watch its movies at home. The studio took “Elemental” to the Cannes Film Festival to amplify the point (to all the youngsters sunning themselves on the French Riviera?) that Pixar is again making movies for the big screen."
The already disastrous and severely downgraded goal of $35 Million domestic wasn't achieved. Not even $30 Million.
Elemental's grand total for US box office as of Sunday night once the last multiplex in Hawaii closed...
$29,602,429
Maybe we should have waited a few more hours to get the box office from Guam and American Samoa?
‘The Flash’ Targets $70 Million, Pixar’s ‘Elemental’ Aims for $35 Million in Underwhelming Box Office Battle
"The Flash" opens at the box office against Pixar's "Elemental."
variety.com
Dam, you're right!
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
(Fast forward to November when someone posts a screenshot showing this film was in the top five for streaming viewership, alongside films you didn’t even know existed - “See, it’s not a total loss!”)From another Variety article today, the respected industry mag confirms the price tags for production and marketing of Elemental.
"At the domestic box office, “Elemental” flopped with $25.9 million, landing by far the worst start in Pixar’s history. Like “The Flash,” “Elemental” also cost $200 million to produce and roughly $100 million to promote."
Does the Smart Set here want to do their wizard math on that for a break even number?
Because my damp cocktail napkin math says that Elemental needs to make at least $600 Million globally to break even.
‘The Flash’ Stumbles at International Box Office With $75 Million, Pixar’s ‘Elemental’ Crashes With $15 Million Overseas
"The Flash" and Disney's Pixar adventure "Elemental" failed to catch fire with international audiences.
Nice try pre-butting actual data that conflicts with nerdrage fueled statements posing as facts but are meritless and baseless.
Sorry that facts makes you feel bad.
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
Ask Angus MacLane how the “lotsa people eventually watched it on D+” argument worked out.
Sorry that the math (Hollywood or otherwise) makes you feel bad.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
We gotta get you some Xanax…or a Buddhist?
How does their struggles really affect you? They don’t…so stop denying the struggles exist.
You still haven’t found what you’re looking for…in 2023 -the year of Bob’s collapse.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Ok…adios before people try to throw themselves across iger’s chest like the secret service 
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
This is an interesting thought and I hadn’t thought about it quite like that before. I’d say at least half of the people that end up watching on Disney + had no plans of watching it all. Meaning, they didn’t consciously make the decision to forego seeing it at the theatre because it’ll be on Disney + soon, they just didn’t care or it was convenient or they just subconsciously know all movies will up there very soon. Now what percentage of these people don’t care because of Disney + or because they’ve lost faith in the brand is the question.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
He shot Clint with a Wii Remote!Ok…adios before people try to throw themselves across iger’s chest like the secret service
View attachment 725218
Keep in mind that a significant number of foreign markets aren't showing Elemental at this time. Releases are staggered throughout the Summer.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
For those tracking the global box office for Elemental, here's the list of countries that have not begun Elemental screenings yet, and their date of release (to align with Bank Holidays, or something);
Italy & France: 6/21
Germany, Mexico, Brazil & New Zealand: 6/22
United Kingdom: 7/7
The Netherlands: 7/12
Spain: 7/14
Japan: 8/4
It's already opened everywhere else, mainly in Asia and Australia.
What I don't understand is how little money Disney gets from these releases in Communist China. Elemental only made 3.3 Million in China this past weekend, but made 4 Million in South Korea. Do movie tickets cost 10 cents in China or something?
South Korea, Population 52 Million, Weekend Box Office $4 Million
Communist China, Population 1.41 Billion, Weekend Box Office $3.5 Million
Last edited:
spacemt354
Chili's
Would definitely have been interesting to see, but if I had to guess I don't think all of them would have flopped. While not scientific, comparing scores, budgets, and bo performance from previous Pixar films, with full runs I'd guess somewhere around these numbers. Ironically the only one that turned 'red' was turning red for me.
Wall-E - RT - 95% Audience 90%, Budget $180M, BO $521M
Onward - RT 88% Audience 95%, Budget $175-200M, BO $500-550M
Inside Out - RT 98% Audience 89%, Budget $175M, BO $857M
Soul - RT 95% Audience 88%, Budget $175M, BO $800-850M
Coco - RT - 97% Audience 94%, Budget $175M, BO $807M
Luca - RT 91% Audience 85% Budget (prob) $150-175M, BO *600-700M
The Good Dinosaur - RT 75% Audience 64%, Budget $175M, BO $332M
Turning Red - RT 95% Audience 69%, Budget $175M, BO *$400-450M
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
It's a bit of a counter factual, but I suspect Luca would not have been exactly a blockbuster but would have done well. It's a very sweet, fun, and also moving film in a really appealing setting which I think would have held up quite well for a long box office run. It's also one that I think is neither too boring or heavy for kids while not being too much of a kids film for adults.
Soul probably would also have done ok just because the Pixar brand was still riding relatively high at that point.
Oh no! It's the end of Pixa..........just kidding!
But seriously, Pixar needs a lot of fixing to do, if they want to be a box office success again. I'll try not to worry for WDAS, but if I were in charge of Pixar, I end this political nonsense and making it family friendly again. Of course, I've heard there's a glimmer of hope for Pixar with Elio. It's on this tweet:
But seriously, Pixar needs a lot of fixing to do, if they want to be a box office success again. I'll try not to worry for WDAS, but if I were in charge of Pixar, I end this political nonsense and making it family friendly again. Of course, I've heard there's a glimmer of hope for Pixar with Elio. It's on this tweet:
Last edited:
choco choco
Well-Known Member
Before I begin my critique, I'm simply going to quote legendary screenwriter William Goldman, who, when talking about success of a Hollywood film, stated basically, "Nobody knows anything."
Now, if I had to pinpoint anything, I would say Pixar has become too predictable. For a while, I lambasted their tendency to constantly make the same buddy travelogue comedy, which nearly all their early films were (two opposites hit the road and, in the process, learn not only to accept but become true friends with their opposing companion). This was clearly Lasseter's bread and butter (and often the only film he allowed to be greenlit), and when he left (which had nothing to do with his creative direction of his studio) I nonetheless was looking forward to what Pete Doctor was gonna bring.
Under Pete's tenure, Pixar has mostly gone for bildungromans disguised with anthropomorphic metaphors. The themes of growing up and maturing into adulthood is clearly dear to Mr. Doctor, but I think he's making the same mistake Lasseter made, which is that just because he likes these kinds of stories, doesn't mean every film has to explore the same issue. For Lasseter, it was stubbornness to a story format (they're buddies, but monsters! This time they're buddies, but cars! Now they are also buddies, but chefs!) For Pete, it's the same coming-of-age story with a sheen of the supernatural or fantasy to justify it being an animated film. I still don't understand why Onward needed the fantasy world setting if that movie could have been told with just plain old humans. Same with Elemental. Same with Turning Red. Same with Luca. I don't even think any of these movies are particularly bad, it's just he's draping the same wall with different types of wallpaper and trying to make us pay for it multiple times. But I think audiences have come to know what to expect, and so there literally is no urgency to turn out for a movie where you absolutely know what's coming.
I'm going to say Pixar has become the Norman Rockwell of American studios, because all the criticism of that artist can be leveled at the Pixar: they make awfully technically accomplished works that traffic in a type of predictably sanitary, overly gooey sentimentality; their characters are often the same - no matter they be pandas or elfs or water droplets, they're all basically the same character; their arcs are often the same; and the way these stories are developed lead to stories that are told according to a very specific rhythm that was once revolutionary but has over time developed into a crutch. They can't break our of their own shell.
I'm also not happy with the visual development of a lot of these films. Character development has been weak, the characters all look vaguely similar. There's nothing inherently wrong with the Cal Arts style (though I'm not a huge fan) but the whole industry moved toward it over a decade ago, and it's a little dated now. And they continue to push into photorealism, bolstered by the fact that they have more resources than any other studio to take the time to get computer animation right. That's all well and good, but I think audiences are kinda tired of this look. Perhaps do what Dreamworks and Sony Animation has done, and aim for an animated look that is more abstract and expressive. I loved the looks of The Bad Guys and Puss in Boots 2 for Dreamworks. I loved Sony Animation's Mitchell vs. The Machines. And then of course, Spiderman Across the Universe kicked the industry twenty years into the future; I think that film is one of the audiovisual highlight of the last couple years, and a legitimate landmark achievement in the history of cinema. All these films broke open the mold of CGI animation. But Pixar has, by and large, still been trapped toward the realism look they've always been going toward.
Pixar needs to take more chances with everything: story content, story-telling, artistic expression, visual development, sonic development....they've been so entrenched in their method that the industry as a whole has left them behind. Dear Pixar, stop being conservative! Aim for infinity...and beyond.
Last edited:
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Pixar's VP of DEI and the VP of HR would like to speak with you first thing in the morning.
Bring your office keys and your company phone, please.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
This whole post but this especially.
Strongly believe one of the main reasons for Spider-verse enthusiasm is that impressionistic style that opens the film. Would absolutely love for Pixar to show some competitive spirit, find the right situation, and do their Fantasia. Alas.