4 ms·

Hmm, so ever since the takeover by Disney in 2006 we saw a decline in quality. Call me biased, but I might see the problem.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
I guess. If you call Wall-E and Toy Story 3 evidence of a decline in quality.
- nickpeterson 3y ago
  It takes awhile for strong culture to erode. You can see a similar thing with Apple after Jobs, the products still make money, but the magic is gone.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    I think it's just as easy to see it as evidence that Pixar is too large -- trying to focus on too many things. But the reality is that most creative endeavours peter out a bit, because all long-lived creative endeavours exist in the context of nostalgia for their halcyon days. It's impossible for everyone to unsee what went before. And all creative endeavours eventually stray somewhat from self-reflection towards navel-gazing. (Like the Vision Pro, which is so completely a product of the totality of Apple culture that it is basically white cider, when what everyone is really keen to see is a very good scrumpy.)
  - DarkNova6 3y ago
    This right here
WorldMaker 3y ago
Cars was pre-Disney and one of John Lasseter's pet projects (some say being the original idea before Toy Story even). John Lasseter in general is an interesting thread to pull there at that point because there are many competing narratives. When Disney bought Pixar Lasseter moved in charge of all of Disney animation. So there are the narratives that Pixar didn't see a noticeable change because the boss was still the boss and the boss was still reporting directly to the C-Suite, even if the C-Suite changed dramatically. There are also the narratives that because Lasseter originated at Disney Feature Animation and may have felt that Pixar was always the "mistress" and DFA the "wife" that Lasseter "sabotaged" some of Pixar's efforts in favor of the marquee brand, the historic brand, DFA. (There's some evidence for the "sabotage" narrative: after the expense of The Princess and the Frog failed to impress the C-Suite and DFA turned to primarily 3D animation DFA was encouraged to compete with Pixar, built a very different renderer and something of a different tech stack in general. It seems easy to argue that DFA's tech quickly got superior to Pixar's. There are environment and crowd shots in Wreck-It-Ralph and Big Hero 6 that Pixar still seems to struggle to match years later. Personally, I thought it most noticeable in Soul where most of the wide establishing shots consist of "empty clouds" and its version of New Orleans feels both empty and claustrophobic. At nearly the same time Soul released to Disney+ DFA released a lovely short of a digital New Orleans with gorgeous establishing shots and crowd work and it felt almost a direct flex on Soul and exactly what Soul was lacking in its characterization of New Orleans. [This was Us Again, which was theatrically attached to Raya, as much as theatrical attachment of shorts mattered in that strange year.]) It's probably one of those cases where both narratives are "true" in their ways. Pixar never really saw a different boss and seemed to continue down a lot of the same path, including two Cars sequels because Lasseter loved Cars. Lasseter likely did see the competition with DFA as a part of Pixar's success pre-buyout, so continued it hoping it would keep Pixar hungry and innovating. Lasseter seemed to try to genuinely juggle obligations to both DFA and Pixar (The "mistress" versus "wife" analogy being an especially cruel one, but seemingly quite appropriate, for me to pick because the end of the thread was that Lasseter was eventually fired from Disney for being a sex pest; though don't feel too bad about how "canceled" Disney tried to make him because he still heads an animation company. Ironically one again with weird Apple connections because Apple TV+ has been buying most of their streaming rights. [The goofy Luck was the first notable one from that company.]) (Further aside: I also don't think A Bug's Life has aged as well as some think it has. It had great quality compared to its competition at the time, but outside of that context, it's "fine" and hasn't aged well. I think that is also evidence that maybe Pixar was "never" a masterpiece factory, not even pre-Disney buyout.)

bemusedthrow75 3y ago

I guess. If you call Wall-E and Toy Story 3 evidence of a decline in quality.

nickpeterson 3y ago
It takes awhile for strong culture to erode. You can see a similar thing with Apple after Jobs, the products still make money, but the magic is gone.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  I think it's just as easy to see it as evidence that Pixar is too large -- trying to focus on too many things. But the reality is that most creative endeavours peter out a bit, because all long-lived creative endeavours exist in the context of nostalgia for their halcyon days. It's impossible for everyone to unsee what went before. And all creative endeavours eventually stray somewhat from self-reflection towards navel-gazing. (Like the Vision Pro, which is so completely a product of the totality of Apple culture that it is basically white cider, when what everyone is really keen to see is a very good scrumpy.)
- DarkNova6 3y ago
  This right here

WorldMaker 3y ago

Cars was pre-Disney and one of John Lasseter's pet projects (some say being the original idea before Toy Story even). John Lasseter in general is an interesting thread to pull there at that point because there are many competing narratives. When Disney bought Pixar Lasseter moved in charge of all of Disney animation. So there are the narratives that Pixar didn't see a noticeable change because the boss was still the boss and the boss was still reporting directly to the C-Suite, even if the C-Suite changed dramatically. There are also the narratives that because Lasseter originated at Disney Feature Animation and may have felt that Pixar was always the "mistress" and DFA the "wife" that Lasseter "sabotaged" some of Pixar's efforts in favor of the marquee brand, the historic brand, DFA. (There's some evidence for the "sabotage" narrative: after the expense of The Princess and the Frog failed to impress the C-Suite and DFA turned to primarily 3D animation DFA was encouraged to compete with Pixar, built a very different renderer and something of a different tech stack in general. It seems easy to argue that DFA's tech quickly got superior to Pixar's. There are environment and crowd shots in Wreck-It-Ralph and Big Hero 6 that Pixar still seems to struggle to match years later. Personally, I thought it most noticeable in Soul where most of the wide establishing shots consist of "empty clouds" and its version of New Orleans feels both empty and claustrophobic. At nearly the same time Soul released to Disney+ DFA released a lovely short of a digital New Orleans with gorgeous establishing shots and crowd work and it felt almost a direct flex on Soul and exactly what Soul was lacking in its characterization of New Orleans. [This was Us Again, which was theatrically attached to Raya, as much as theatrical attachment of shorts mattered in that strange year.]) It's probably one of those cases where both narratives are "true" in their ways. Pixar never really saw a different boss and seemed to continue down a lot of the same path, including two Cars sequels because Lasseter loved Cars. Lasseter likely did see the competition with DFA as a part of Pixar's success pre-buyout, so continued it hoping it would keep Pixar hungry and innovating. Lasseter seemed to try to genuinely juggle obligations to both DFA and Pixar (The "mistress" versus "wife" analogy being an especially cruel one, but seemingly quite appropriate, for me to pick because the end of the thread was that Lasseter was eventually fired from Disney for being a sex pest; though don't feel too bad about how "canceled" Disney tried to make him because he still heads an animation company. Ironically one again with weird Apple connections because Apple TV+ has been buying most of their streaming rights. [The goofy Luck was the first notable one from that company.]) (Further aside: I also don't think A Bug's Life has aged as well as some think it has. It had great quality compared to its competition at the time, but outside of that context, it's "fine" and hasn't aged well. I think that is also evidence that maybe Pixar was "never" a masterpiece factory, not even pre-Disney buyout.)