Is Pixar the new Disney?

[BK]

The question is pointless, let's put it that way.

What kind of responses do you expect from a board like this?

No offense to anyone, but seriously, there are people here who buy movies just because it is from Disney, whether good or not doesn't even factor. Then there are the Walt-apologists, short-sighted, narrow-minded and snobbish, the CGI-haters, etc. True, they are all opinions but there is so much inherent bias here it's incredible.

Define Disney, you say great entertainment, well, what do you mean by entertainment, solely about movies? Why for are there screams of theme parks and other blind sentiment being thrown about? At that, does great entertainment mean animation movies only because if you want to compare Pixar, they have only made animation movies. But is it a fair comparison? Animation has been written off as for kids for a long time, so much so, that you can't compare with any other studio because no one else in Hollywood cared to make animated movies. Disney had a stranglehold because no one else wanted to, and really, Pinocchio/Fantasia/not sure what else flopped during their time. This is revisionist.

If you want to go into film analysis, how many actually hold up? Or is nostalgia blinding you? Pixar are no Disney, they are their own separate entity, they cannot become or usurp Disney since at present they are part of Disney and when they bring in the critical acclaim and bucks, why would they ever be let go? This may seem contradictory but people recognize them as their own brand, which is a different entity but they are of course physically owned by Disney thus they can't usurp the studio. Sometimes it seems people here are bitter that Disney lost their way and Pixar took up their mantle, or that other studios like Dreamworks are popular, and then you have the discrimination against foreign animation, it doesn't come up with every topic, but one such as this is bait for all of the biased opinions to come to the fore.

But, why be bitter? How can you not be able to see a movie for what it is, a bloody movie, not a Disney/Pixar movie or whichever studio movie. That kind of sentiment is ridiculously immature. Lasseter only started Pixar because Disney heads were assholes. Do you want to defend them then? If you want to stand by the artists, then why don't you care that they can't hold down a constant job because of all the internal turmoil, studio politics? Seems there are too many wearing the rose-coloured spectacles, whether by choice or by naivety not seeing the big picture and resort to petty reasons for why it is better or worse.

This is not to say everyone is like that, of course not, there are many people with very valid opinions, but there is quite a large legion of illogical and disconnected posters as already evidenced and this has been brought up countless times with no positive result just like circular colour debates, format wars and other idiotic arguments that rear their heads every so often.

[Semaj]

I say No because Pixar doesn't have a legacy.

Only in terms of proving that full-length movies can be made with full CGI they do.

Pixar definitely appears to have picked up the pieces that were dropped by Disney in the past decade, and in the process made a household name for themselves. Even Disney during Walt's time could not brag about an unbroken success with feature films.

Meanwhile, Disney still needs Pixar to teach them how to make (great) movies again, and they're still trying to catch up with three other animation studios. No longer is the animated feature reserved for one studio.

[Goliath]

Absolutely. Pixar *is* the new Disney. Of course, on this biased forum (it is/was called 'Ultimate Disney', after all!), most people will vote 'no'. But that will give you a prejudiced, biased and, therefore, misleading result. I bet if you put up this poll on any other internet forum, you will get a whole lote more 'yes'-votes. Don't expect to get an objective answer on a 'Disney forum'. Because most people here still see Disney as the company/animation studio they grew up with, or the company/studio from Walt's days --and they project that image on today's corporation. But most non-fans, aka the regular audience, will not do so.

Disney's image has been seriously tainted, starting in the late 1990's. Ask anybody outside of the Disney fan-community, and you'll learn they think Disney, nowadays, stands for second-rate direct-to-dvd sequels (which are generally considered as nothing more than cash-cows); bad sitcoms aimed at teenage girls; and an overkill in Princess merchandise. Adults and adolescents simply don't take Disney seriously anymore. That's not my personal opinion, but it's what I hear from people all around me and from what I read on other message boards. Disney isn't considered 'entertainment for children and adults alike' anymore. The 1990's are over. They're seen as a babysitter for the little ones. Pop in a princess film (or heck, even a sequel, they won't see the difference at that age anyway!) and have them be quit for an hour.

Now Pixar on the other hand, *is* being considered as 'family entertainment', which truly makes movie for all ages/demographics. You'll find plenty of adults who go to Pixar films alone or who own the dvd's and are not ashamed of them. Once again, this is talking about the general public, not the fan community. Pixar is being taken seriously. Try taking a friend to a Disney movie --you have to beg them and if you're *very* lucky, they'll go with you, reluctantly. No need to beg them to go watch a Pixar film.

And let's ne honest, Pixar *has* made the better films for the past decade! The only great film Disney made was Lilo & Stitch, and Rapunzel is a very good follow-up. Pixar has had succes upon succes, and that's because they do stories, characters, emotions, atmosphere, animation, spirit, music etc. the way Disney used to do it. They dare to do new things, touch upon 'risky' subjects, they dare to do serious and sincere moments. Pixar takes its audience seriously, while Disney panders to them. (E.g. changing a film's title to appeal to a certain demographic.)

That's why Pixar is the new Disney.

[pap64]

Oh boy, this is the one question that gets the panties of a bunch of Disney fanboys in a major knot . But all kidding aside, here is my answer...

No...

And I don't mean that as an insult towards the company. Pixar may be part of the Disney company now, but they have gained its own identity so big that there's no mistaking them for Disney. Had they followed the exact, same ideas as Disney then yeah, I would have agreed. But, they have created their own rules, their own stories, their own characters and their own company beliefs.

[Mickeyfan1990]

Much as I love Pixar, I don't think they're the next Disney.

[Disney's Divinity]

Personally, no. It’s not that I hate Pixar, in fact I love some of their movies (Toy Story, Monster‘s, Inc., Incredibles). But, generally, I’ve never felt the same thing about them as I do Disney films (or Miyazaki films, or Don Bluth films, or even the rare Dreamworks or Fox film, tbh). I’ve never understood the Pixar love, especially to the extent that it’s become since Finding Nemo (when the movies seem to only get worse for me, based on Cars to Up--haven‘t seen TS3 yet, so maybe that‘ll break the curse for me). I find their movies enjoyable, but even the best only inspires me to watch two or three times at the most. That’s just my own experience though (insert “Disney fanboy” criticism, because you can’t dislike Pixar without being a Disney fanboy. *sigh*)

Also, as previously said, I’m not sure if they’ll ever create the same kind of legacy as Disney, just because they’ve become an attachment of Disney at this point. Disney’s always going to be the head company/name. It’s true they’ve been successful, and probably will be for a very long time. I don’t see them going away, but I don’t really see them as Disney either.

Besides all that, I’m not sure if I want Pixar to “teach” Disney anything. Besides the fact that their movies leave me cold most of the time, “Pixar” isn’t the same as “Disney” to me, anymore than I would say Studio Ghibli is like Disney or Pixar. They have their own feel’s. Besides, Disney has always gone through dark periods--and they‘ve managed to still be here 70 years later. It’ll come around eventually (that‘s to say it hasn‘t already started to).

[BellesPrince]

It always makes me laugh how a certain poster of a gigantic (perhaps his name refers to his ego?) nature always forces his opinion down everyone else's throat and trashes anyone else's opinion. Especially when that person seems to be leading the charge of the grumpy grouches that I commented on in another post yesterday.

[BK]

Personally, no. It’s not that I hate Pixar, in fact I love some of their movies (Toy Story, Monster‘s, Inc., Incredibles). But, generally, I’ve never felt the same thing about them as I do Disney films (or Miyazaki films, or Don Bluth films, or even the rare Dreamworks or Fox film, tbh). I’ve never understood the Pixar love, especially to the extent that it’s become since Finding Nemo (when the movies seem to only get worse for me, based on Cars to Up--haven‘t seen TS3 yet, so maybe that‘ll break the curse for me). I find their movies enjoyable, but even the best only inspires me to watch two or three times at the most. That’s just my own experience though (insert “Disney fanboy” criticism, because you can’t dislike Pixar without being a Disney fanboy. *sigh*)

Also, as previously said, I’m not sure if they’ll ever create the same kind of legacy as Disney, just because they’ve become an attachment of Disney at this point. Disney’s always going to be the head company/name. It’s true they’ve been successful, and probably will be for a very long time. I don’t see them going away, but I don’t really see them as Disney either.

Besides all that, I’m not sure if I want Pixar to “teach” Disney anything. Besides the fact that their movies leave me cold most of the time, “Pixar” isn’t the same as “Disney” to me, anymore than I would say Studio Ghibli is like Disney or Pixar. They have their own feel’s. Besides, Disney has always gone through dark periods--and they‘ve managed to still be here 70 years later. It’ll come around eventually (that‘s to say it hasn‘t already started to).

Regarding your first paragraph, what do you mean by the parenthesis? Are you saying that each of those studios, going from most likely to less as you've ordered it, have made a film that is equivalent of your personal standard that Disney often match but Pixar has not?

I'll say it right here now, I love Pixar, so obviously it might be harder for me to understand, that is of course not to say your opinion is invalid, but how is it that of Pixar's 11 films none have matched the rare Dreamworks film or Fox film, which I think you mean Blue Sky whose catalogue is limited to the Ice Age series, Robots and Horton Hears A Who?

I quite love animation as a whole actually, and I did like Horton, Robots and Ice Age 1 & 3, hell I liked Shark Tale while most don't, but to say that as you said, well, that doesn't sound real to be honest and I'll be skeptical, not that you would care, until you actually reveal which of these films trump not one, but all of Pixar's catalogue otherwise it would seem you added them in to deflect what would otherwise be as you say a Disney fanboy opinion.

[SmartAleck25]

It always makes me laugh how a certain poster of a gigantic (perhaps his name refers to his ego?) nature always forces his opinion down everyone else's throat and trashes anyone else's opinion. Especially when that person seems to be leading the charge of the grumpy grouches that I commented on in another post yesterday.

I would be more careful of what I post about other members, just saying.

[Disney's Divinity]

Regarding your first paragraph, what do you mean by the parenthesis? Are you saying that each of those studios, going from most likely to less as you've ordered it, have made a film that is equivalent of your personal standard that Disney often match but Pixar has not?

I said that these movies are ones I've enjoyed (and I didn't mean to list them in any particular order). I wasn't saying Pixar's films were good/bad there, just that I've enjoyed few of them, and that I rarely want to see them beyond the 2nd viewing (v. films like The Land Before Time, Kiki's Delivery Service, The Prince of Egypt, Kung Fu Panda, How To Train Your Dragon, etc. that I enjoy, and that I re-visit now and then). As I said, that's just my experience with their films.

I'll say it right here now, I love Pixar, so obviously it might be harder for me to understand, that is of course not to say your opinion is invalid, but how is it that of Pixar's 11 films none have matched the rare Dreamworks film or Fox film, which I think you mean Blue Sky whose catalogue is limited to the Ice Age series, Robots and Horton Hears A Who?

I didn't say they "haven't matched," but that I wasn't particularly crazy about them. Though they are largely well-made films. I just rarely have any interest after I've watched them to see them again, where movies I always re-visit movies I've enjoyed. Their characters and stories usually don't interest me.

I quite love animation as a whole actually, and I did like Horton, Robots and Ice Age 1 & 3, hell I liked Shark Tale while most don't, but to say that as you said, well, that doesn't sound real to be honest and I'll be skeptical, not that you would care, until you actually reveal which of these films trump not one, but all of Pixar's catalogue otherwise it would seem you added them in to deflect what would otherwise be as you say a Disney fanboy opinion.

I didn't say they "trumped" Pixar's films. I didn't even say I disliked all their films (I listed ones I enjoyed). All I said is that I'm personally just not that crazy about most of Pixar's films (particularly the recent ones). That's all.

Also, I can't help but think you have "a Pixar fanboy opinion" on the subject. Many people don't like Disney films. It's not a crime to feel a certain way about film.

[avonleastories95]

When most of you have it in a few detailed paragraphs, I will just offer my opinion in a well thought out sentence.
PIXAR CAN NEVER BE DISNRY BEACAUSE USUALLY 2D ANIMATION IS> COMPUTER ANIMATION. Even Pixar movies and yes, Tangled too, can't replace Classics like Snow White, 101 Dalmatians, Peter Pan, and Sleeping Beauty. In my mind, there is less quality in a computer animation, animation and story wise.

[Kyle]

When most of you have it in a few detailed paragraphs, I will just offer my opinion in a well thought out sentence.
PIXAR CAN NEVER BE DISNRY BEACAUSE USUALLY 2D ANIMATION IS> COMPUTER ANIMATION. Even Pixar movies and yes, Tangled too, can't replace Classics like Snow White, 101 Dalmatians, Peter Pan, and Sleeping Beauty. In my mind, there is less quality in a computer animation, animation and story wise.

bs

[Elladorine]

I'll always have a special love reserved for hand-drawn animation, but I can certainly enjoy and appreciate all the hard work and artistry that goes into CG (which often seems to get dismissed since computers are involved). But whether an animated film is hand-drawn or CG does not effect the quality of the story being told, that's dictated by other factors entirely.

General audiences of today get excited about Pixar films in the way that yesterday's audiences did about Disney. Maybe "replace" isn't the right term, but I feel that Pixar has definitely reigned supreme when it comes to family-friendly films that can be enjoyed by all ages.

[BK]

Regarding your first paragraph, what do you mean by the parenthesis? Are you saying that each of those studios, going from most likely to less as you've ordered it, have made a film that is equivalent of your personal standard that Disney often match but Pixar has not?

I said that these movies are ones I've enjoyed (and I didn't mean to list them in any particular order). I wasn't saying Pixar's films were good/bad there, just that I've enjoyed few of them, and that I rarely want to see them beyond the 2nd viewing (v. films like The Land Before Time, Kiki's Delivery Service, The Prince of Egypt, Kung Fu Panda, How To Train Your Dragon, etc. that I enjoy, and that I re-visit now and then). As I said, that's just my experience with their films.

I'll say it right here now, I love Pixar, so obviously it might be harder for me to understand, that is of course not to say your opinion is invalid, but how is it that of Pixar's 11 films none have matched the rare Dreamworks film or Fox film, which I think you mean Blue Sky whose catalogue is limited to the Ice Age series, Robots and Horton Hears A Who?

I didn't say they "haven't matched," but that I wasn't particularly crazy about them. Though they are largely well-made films. I just rarely have any interest after I've watched them to see them again, where movies I always re-visit movies I've enjoyed. Their characters and stories usually don't interest me.

I quite love animation as a whole actually, and I did like Horton, Robots and Ice Age 1 & 3, hell I liked Shark Tale while most don't, but to say that as you said, well, that doesn't sound real to be honest and I'll be skeptical, not that you would care, until you actually reveal which of these films trump not one, but all of Pixar's catalogue otherwise it would seem you added them in to deflect what would otherwise be as you say a Disney fanboy opinion.

I didn't say they "trumped" Pixar's films. I didn't even say I disliked all their films (I listed ones I enjoyed). All I said is that I'm personally just not that crazy about most of Pixar's films (particularly the recent ones). That's all.

Also, I can't help but think you have "a Pixar fanboy opinion" on the subject. Many people don't like Disney films. It's not a crime to feel a certain way about film.

I don't deny that but being one does not make me blind in support, neither does being a Disney fan, but you look at the "opinions" on here, and you cannot seriously say that those are valid. Another post has appeared claiming stories in CGI cannot compare to 2D stories, sheer stupidity, to be extremely blunt.

[David_Mcnab]

I like Pixar, and Disney films. I like Dreamworks, Sony, Fox, and others as well.

I love Studio Ghibli the most. Still, this doesn't make me hate anything else, as if it entertains me, then I love it. It's that simple, and that's why I have
always wanted to be an animator, as I love the amount of effort that goes into these things be it 2D or 3D (imagine it being in 4D!)...

Hey, I never thought that I'd like UP, as I had seen a bit of it when my family rented it, but now I have the Blu Ray of it and love it! ^_^

Same goes for Madagascar - I had always written it off as a crappy movie, and I don't like Ben Stiller, but I really liked the movie, as with Ice Age 1!