DVDizzy Forum

Farerb wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2026 5:06 am This movie is insane.

It actually has the main protagonist murder another character and it's played for laughs.

Is that a bad thing per se?

Yeah, that'll go down as one of the more bizarre things to happen in a Pixar movie, but I'd also say that some of the impact is softened by the reality that Meryl Streep's Moth Queen also had genocidal designs and would have killed many civilians if she had not been squished.

I just returned from the movie theater. Even though I went with low expectations due to the film’s unappealing marketing, I was still disappointed. For one, it didn’t feel like a Pixar movie at all. It was so zany, frenetic, and lacking in believability—requiring a much greater suspension of disbelief than usual—that it felt more like a Cartoon Network production than a Pixar one. The pacing was relentless, leaving no time for moments to breathe or settle; the themes were heavy-handed and awkwardly executed, constantly hitting you over the head in a repetitive and simplistic manner. Not to mention, the film's humor was unusually wacky and juvenile by Pixar standards. The film, in general, felt like it skewed younger than the average Pixar feature.

The emotional payoff didn't work for me either, likely because the central relationship felt mismatched and superficial. I didn't feel the strong bond between Mabel and King George that the film attempted to convey. The last scene gave the impression that Mabel was replacing her grandma with King George by having him frequent her and her grandma's special place, even going as far as to recreate similar moments Mabel had with her, an implication I'm sure was unintentional, yet jarring.

I'm a bit surprised by the high praise the film has received, as it lacked the intellectual depth and emotional resonance Pixar's top-tier films are known for.

I did not expect to like this, damn (they got me again) The promoting for this film did not intrigue me in any way. I felt the designs looked way too cheap at first. Similarly to The Mediocre Dinosaur film, but at least they made the smart move to adapt the appearances of the animals between the two worlds, (the black dead eyes). And that pancake breakfast sequence was just them showing off a Turning Red 2.0 visuals in food, like damn.

In many ways this film reminded me of a little crossover between Meet The Robinsons & Over The Hedge, two films I enjoyed and also was surprised by (from terrible marketing). I did not expect anything good from this film, but I enjoyed it just fine and liked Mabel's epilogue. I know that can resonate with a lot of young people. I'm worried about Gatto and will not be expecting anything great. Hopefully so I can enjoy that one too.

BloomHunter wrote: ↑Sun Mar 22, 2026 7:55 amI felt the designs looked way too cheap at first. Similarly to The Mediocre Dinosaur film, but at least they made the smart move to adapt the appearances of the animals between the two worlds, (the black dead eyes).

Are you talking about The Good Dinosaur?

In many ways this film reminded me of a little crossover between Meet The Robinsons & Over The Hedge.

Agreed, it reminded me of Over The Hedge.

BloomHunter wrote: ↑Sun Mar 22, 2026 7:55 am I did not expect to like this, damn (they got me again) The promoting for this film did not intrigue me in any way. I felt the designs looked way too cheap at first. Similarly to The Mediocre Dinosaur film, but at least they made the smart move to adapt the appearances of the animals between the two worlds, (the black dead eyes). And that pancake breakfast sequence was just them showing off a Turning Red 2.0 visuals in food, like damn.

In many ways this film reminded me of a little crossover between Meet The Robinsons & Over The Hedge, two films I enjoyed and also was surprised by (from terrible marketing). I did not expect anything good from this film, but I enjoyed it just fine and liked Mabel's epilogue. I know that can resonate with a lot of young people. I'm worried about Gatto and will not be expecting anything great. Hopefully so I can enjoy that one too.

“Pancake breakfast sequence”? What are you talking about?

A lot of people are commenting on its impressive run, but if it manages to double its current haul, its final gross will land very close to Elemental's--which is not guaranteed since we are weeks away from "Mario." Will Pixar still see Hoppers as such a hit once it sits right next to that movie after publicly declaring they didn't see it as one of their golden children?

Sotiris wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2026 5:00 pm The emotional payoff didn't work for me either, likely because the central relationship felt mismatched and superficial. I didn't feel the strong bond between Mabel and King George that the film attempted to convey. The last scene gave the impression that Mabel was replacing her grandma with King George by having him frequent her and her grandma's special place, even going as far as to recreate similar moments Mabel had with her, an implication I'm sure was unintentional, yet jarring.

What about that was jarring for you? Isn't that kind of the natural rhythm of things? Mabel's made peace with losing her grandma and is now open to experiencing companionship with her current circle? Or was it just that you didn't buy into Mabel and George's friendship?

Sotiris wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2026 5:00 pm I'm a bit surprised by the high praise the film has received, as it lacked the intellectual depth and emotional resonance Pixar's top-tier films are known for.

Yeah, even coming from someone who enjoyed the film, I'll admit I don't know what to do with this movie's success. Like, I don't have an explanation for what itch this movie was scratching, particularly since it was so different from what people have historically responded to with Pixar.

PatchofBlue wrote: ↑Mon Mar 23, 2026 12:36 pmWhat about that was jarring for you? Isn't that kind of the natural rhythm of things? Mabel's made peace with losing her grandma and is now open to experiencing companionship with her current circle? Or was it just that you didn't buy into Mabel and George's friendship?

I think Mabel and George should have had a new thing of their own instead of him taking her Grandma's place in her old routine. He even did the tapping motion for Mabel to sit at the usual spot that her Grandma used to do. That felt like Mabel had replaced her Grandma with a beaver. It would have been better if they found a new spot to hang out or something new for them to do together that wasn't a callback to Mabel's time with her Grandma.

I also didn't buy that much into their friendship, in general. Their personalities didn't really mesh. The whole thing kinda felt forced to me.

Sotiris wrote: ↑Mon Mar 23, 2026 2:14 pm I think Mabel and George should have had a new thing of their own instead of him taking her Grandma's place in her old routine. He even did the tapping motion for Mabel to sit at the usual spot that her Grandma used to do. That felt like Mabel had replaced her Grandma with a beaver. It would have been better if they found a new spot to hang out or something new for them to do together that wasn't a callback to Mabel's time with her Grandma.

I also didn't buy that much into their friendship, in general. Their personalities didn't really mesh. The whole thing kinda felt forced to me.

Agreed. There was little to no chemistry between them, so I never bought their relationship at all. But still, I considered their relationship to be somewhat romance-like. And if that was the case, it`s the closest that we`ve gotten to a romance in a Disney property in a while.

https://variety.com/2026/film/news/box- ... 236701968/

Landing at No. 2 on Friday was Disney and Pixar’s “Hoppers,” which added $3.2 million. The animated adventure should make $11 million by Sunday. Disney and Pixar bet big on “Hoppers,” shelling out $150 million, but it was an investment well made. Through three weekends of release, the family film is projected to gross $138 million in North America and roughly double that worldwide.

https://seat42f.com/box-office-top-5-pr ... y-weekend/

Disney’s Hoppers followed in second place with $12.2 million, bringing its cumulative total to $138.5 million as it continues to show steady performance in theaters. While it experienced a 31% decline, the film remains a solid holdover in a competitive marketplace.

https://www.joblo.com/weekend-box-offic ... in-week-2/

Meanwhile, Pixar’s Hoppers has shown some real legs (or paws), making $12 million this weekend for a $138 million total. It looks like it should end its domestic run around $160 million. That said, it’s about to face major competition from next weekend’s The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, which is likely to eat up a huge portion of the family audience.

https://www.hollywoodoutbreak.com/2026/ ... ice-again/

Pixar’s Hoppers isn’t budging from second place either. The animated feature brought in another $12.2 million, inching its domestic total toward $140 million while Project Hail Mary stays number one above it. Global earnings are closing in on $300 million, which tells you everything about how well this one has traveled. Families keep showing up, and that midweek attendance has been doing a lot of heavy lifting.

Sorry for doing this once again, but here`s my latest entry to my blog about this movie: https://mydisneyanimationanalysis.blogs ... mated.html

https://variety.com/2026/film/box-offic ... 236708742/

Disney’s animated Pixar comedy “Hoppers” landed at No. 4 with $5.8 million in its fifth weekend of release, an unsurprising 52% hit as family crowds overwhelmingly opted to watch the cinematic adventures of Mario and friends. “Hoppers” has generated $149.6 million domestically and $332 million worldwide, a decent showing that’s not quite near the box office heights of Pixar’s greats.

https://www.joblo.com/weekend-box-offic ... -strongly/

As expected, Pixar’s Hoppers fell off pretty strongly at the box office due to competition from Super Mario. It made $5.8 million for a $149 million total. It should end its run in the $170 million range, which is a fair result for a Pixar original these days—if not quite a blockbuster.

https://www.hollywoodoutbreak.com/2026/ ... e_vignette

It was always going to be tough sledding for Hoppers with the Mario Galaxy animated movie pulling families in every direction. But Disney and Pixar’s animated comedy still found its footing, earning $5.8 million in weekend five and reaching $149.6 million domestically with $332 million worldwide. That’s a run the studio should feel proud of heading into its final weeks in theaters.

https://variety.com/2026/film/box-offic ... 236719765/

Pixar’s “Hoppers” rounded out the top five with $4.1 million in its sixth frame. The kid-friendly film is winding down with $157.1 million domestically and $354.4 million globally to date. Although “Hoppers” was hailed as a return to form for Pixar (the animation empire has struggled to launch an original hit), the movie ran out of steam faster than expected; “Hoppers” might only barely break even in its theatrical run against its $150 million budget. However, Disney expects the creature feature to draw audiences on Disney+ and sell plenty of toys inspired by the cute animals in the movie.

At some point, Disney's going to have to learn that in the current landscape, streaming is just where audiences expect to catch these movies. If they want to keep their titles viable, they're going to have either radically restructure how they handle releases to lure them back into the theaters, or start treating a film's streaming run as simply another phase of their life cycle when studying their cultural impact and commercial viability.

The merchandise of the movie has not been amazing so I don't think that they are going to earn much money with that. The creatures were really cute and they could have made something more kawaii now that all this cute plush toys are a popular trend.

Well, now Floppers is sort of done, I guess eyes now move to Hexed as the next original project. Unfortunately, I don't have that much hope for it just going by synopsis and title, but I'm open to being wrong if the designs / adverts look good.

I didn't expect much from Hoppers either, but I did keep open to the possibility it could randomly take off because of how silly it seemed in the vein of Shrek, Minions, etc.

Disney's Divinity wrote: ↑Wed Apr 15, 2026 4:42 am Well, now Floppers is sort of done, I guess eyes now move to Hexed as the next original project. Unfortunately, I don't have that much hope for it just going by synopsis and title, but I'm open to being wrong if the designs / adverts look good.

I didn't expect much from Hoppers either, but I did keep open to the possibility it could randomly take off because of how silly it seemed in the vein of Shrek, Minions, etc.

I don't expect much from new Pixar's original next movies. They are going to still having money because of sequels but their original projects are not what they used to be.
Hoppers is not bad at all but some parts are absurd and the movie could work the same way with 30 min less. I also think that Pixar should stop trying to use this kind of Ghibli / cartoony art style. They lost their visual identity and now they look like generic animated movies.

I think from Pixar's perspective, the cartoony designs have been a deliberate rebuttal against their signature "Pixar look" that they defaulted to for like the first twenty years of their reign. I know I had seen some discussion about the studio resting on their laurels, basically daring them to try something new, and I think the more simplified designs of something like LUCA or Hoppers was them mixing up their toolbox.

And particularly in the wake of something like Elemental flopping(?) with its ridiculous budget, there's a chance they might just favor more cartoonish designs going forward. They're hyping up Gatto as having an intricate, painterly style, but unless that has an impressive haul, we may just have to get used to this style of animation from them.

Jared Bush at WDAS was basically asked something similar some while ago about the looks of their movies and why not something like Spiderverse. His response, paraphrasing was that Disney unlike other studios has 100 years's worth of legacy and that consistency and continuity of visual style is something they work towards when making movies. Although seems like some experimenting will happen soon enough, I don't think it will be anything excessively drastic.

I agree, that one thing of many that I've always liked about WDAS is that their movies' look on a whole is very consistent and that's why when they make something like Once Upon a Studio, all the characters from all the movie don't look off being together and interacting with each other whether 2D or 3D, they all look good together. Don't think this works well for any other studios who at this point in time who are all over the place.

Pixar's choices to go more cartoony in past like what 10 years has downgraded them tbh. Now every Pixar movie that comes out feels like it could have been made by any other studios, they mostly look generic.I much prefer their first generation era of animation too. The first generation was more focused on telling good stories and fun characters and were more focused on telling tales with a timeless potential vs the more self insert, not great looking designs and visuals, stories that feel have no timeless aspect to them either of the recent era.

Pixar’s ‘Hoppers’ Hits $375.1M, Second Only To ‘Elemental’ Among All Post-Pandemic Hollywood Original Films
https://www.cartoonbrew.com/box-office- ... 60388.html

Over the weekend, Pixar’s Hoppers reached a major commercial milestone, climbing to a lifetime global gross of $375.1 million, according to The Numbers. The film has now surpassed Sinners ($370.2 million) to become the second-highest-grossing Hollywood original of the 2020s, trailing only Elemental ($496.4 million).

Directed by Daniel Chong, best known as the creator of We Bare Bears, Hoppers is a major win for Pixar and original animation in a marketplace heavily dominated by sequels and franchise IP.

From its opening weekend, Hoppers signaled strong audience interest and critical favorability, debuting with $46 million domestically and $88 million globally, among the best starts for an original animated film in recent years. The film continued to show strong legs throughout its theatrical run, crossing $120 million domestically by its third weekend and maintaining steady performance internationally. It’s not going to have the legs of Elemental, but that film wasn’t facing down a Mario Bros. juggernaut in its fifth week as Hoppers did. One possible drawback to Pixar exploring the spring theatrical corridor.

Looks like Pixar is going to have to take some stances on how exactly they define "success" on the current battlefield.

Unfortunately, PIXAR don't really make those calls themselves, they and WDAS both answer to larger Disney. I don't think they really see any of the recent originals from WDAS or PIXAR that have been hit hard since the pandemic/streaming took over as "successful" aside from Encanto. The differences between their performances is negligible.

No doubt they're looking at a way to stem the bleeding. It would better to simply have WDAS as the only studio for a lot of reasons. Longer history they can fold other properties into, coming back from dark periods several times, the possibility they could do PIXAR remakes with PIXAR the studio no longer existing while future PIXAR sequels could just be made within WDAS instead. Better to have one studio limping towards eventual hit status again with their originals than two, but with the same number of sequels to both WDAS and PIXAR IP still being pumped out. And any future transition to a more Paperman-esque style that's dominating with things like Puss in Boots: One Last Wish, Spiderverse, and KPOP Demon Hunters would work more with the studio that made Paperman, too. WDAS shifted visual styles a great deal in the '90s.