Pixar and the Obsolete | Big Joel
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Pixar is obsessed with its characters worrying about the future, worrying that a day will come when they're no longer useful. These is a deep dive analysis of why this is, particularly in Up, Toy Story, and Wall-E
Support me on Patreon: / bigjoel
Follow me on Twitter: / biggestjoel
I actually saw most of the Pixar films as dealing with ADULT fear, not childhood anxiety. The feeling of being made obsolete without much control about it is somethig that adults face to an even greater extent than kids. Children may fear the rapid changes they get put through by seemingly uncaring adults, but adults really get hit hard by these changes: Economy, Job Loss, changing roles due to age (which are a mixture of biological changes and external societal norms)... To me most of the Pixar films deal with a version of these issues (at least in part). Woody in Toy Story 1 is basically afraid of losing his job, due to a restructuring of his workplace that he cannot control. The small town in Cars is hit heavy by changes in the economy. Carls life changes for the worse (at first) due to him getting older and society moving on without him. These are very real and understandable fears associated with adult life. Pixar to me does not so much address the fears of children, but attempts to prepare them for these things in a way they can understand and cope with.
Danjal Waziri - Yeah I agree with this - I’ve kind of come to conclusion that Pixar makes movies for adults under the guise of cute Disney-type animation. Not to say Disney hasn’t made some strong message films, but I feel like many more adults have strong feelings about Pixar movies than their kids.
@@saturnine. Disney has made stuff like Wreck it Ralph, Big Hero 6, Lilo & Stitch, and of course The Lion King which all honestly feel like Pixar style movies. But of course they've also made stuff like Tangled and Frozen.
I think they can be doing both, the fears Pixar films present can apply to children as much as adults. However the way they are presented offers far more long-lasting emotional resonance than the arcs of most Disney films. Because the ideas they present and things they deal with are more mature, they hold more emotional value to adults and older adolescents. Some of their films are even more enjoyable as adults, such as The Incredibles. Not that the way Disney does storytelling doesn't have a purpose, but the way Pixar does it feels aimed to hit a wider audience than just children
Wow, well said
This is why pixar is so great. The stories can be enjoyed by both children and adults.
I love how he ignores the second car movie
Kayla Houvenagle and Big Hero 6.
Shnobbs Man Big Hero 6 is Disney, not Pixar, but I see the confusion
We all ignore the second cars movie.
what second car movie
Sigh, blind Cars 2 haters. Idiots.
You do know that the villains of the 2nd movie are victims of shunning because of their own obsoleteness?
Cars 2 is the best Pixar movie to date.
Well, Pixar's latest film "Coco" kinda follows both a Pixar AND a Disney formula. It's about a boy who is not allowed to play music, but he wants to (Disney), and about the passed family members who wants to be remembered (Pixar).
don't even mention that movie, I can't even think about it without having to hold in the waterworks lol
They're merging.
man, i hadn't even thought of coco's role in this formula. but i'd say the pixar-ness shines through wayyyy more. i mean the world is based on people who are dead! that's the ultimate form of becoming obsolete. not only that but these dead people "die" for real when they're forgotten. they fear that total obsolescence in the same way we fear death. obsolescence is built into the world at its very core, specifically the obsolescence that comes with being forgotten.
i'd even say miguel's core desire to play music despite it not being allowed is rooted in obsolescence too. he's worried that music, furthermore his dreams of being a musician, will become obsolete. the conflict itself is based on the actions of a family member who is becoming obselete, as well.
@@koboldcatgirl Have to make room for Blue Sky somehow
@@Carmenifold THIS, but also, Migel's goal of being a musician didn't exactly get fulfilled. Yes, the ban on music in his family ended, but Migel also learned to let go of the role he built up in his head for his life as a superstar musician one day and put value on the family he'd be resenting and working together with them.
All dreamworks movies are about not having to conform to what people expect of you.
Should be top comment.
I feel they move a lot towards family issues, too.
Shrek 2 and 3 are all about parenting and marriage. How to Train Your Dragon also talks about family traditions and a complete life turn about Hiccup's parents. Kung Fu Panda jokes about Po's origin at first, but it develops to become the main focus of the next two movies. Over the Hedge also is about the pertenence of a family and backstabbing, and so on. The Croods, too, has a big focus on family and orders.
I feel Dreamworks gets greatly underappreciated. Movies like Megamind don't get the representation they deserve, and most of the time it isn't taken as a serious studio because there's always a Disney/Pixar movie out there to beat them. Sure, they have mediocre and bad movies like Sharktales, Boss Baby or Bee Movie, but overall they are a great studio with excellent adult jokes, character developement and storytelling which even Disney constantly lacks of.
Bee Movie wasn't bad. It was just a "B" movie.
I think we can all agree that Sony animation is 50/50( cloudy with a chance, Hotel Transylvania are good, everything else is kinda bad) and illumination kinda sucks (except sing, that's good) and blue sky animation( ice age movies, rio movies, the peanuts movie and ferdinand) are okay
Mabye, but isn't it also Disney's approach?
-Moana is expected to be a princess and stay on the island, but she leaves for an adventure.
-In Brave they expect the girl to be a princess, but she wants to be a warrior.
-Ralph is expected to be the villian, but he wants to be a good guy.
-Rapunzel is expected by her "mother" to be loyal to her, but she isn't.
While Disney is fantastic of establishing a stable narrative from well know stories, Pixar creates new ones, with such tenderness and intelligence. Yes, I like Disney, but the desert island test? Pixar all the way
Viking12 I agree but isn't Pixar a subsidiary of Disney?
the best example of obsolete can be seen in COCO where the whole movie revolves around the sunject of being remembered
Actually I was thinking Coco is quite a mix of both. The dead characters are all about being remembered - not becoming obsolete, but the main character Miguel is all the "i want more" from Disney. I think there might be a creative and culture clash now that Disney own Pixar.
Pixar is only able to do that because it is a new company (relative to Disney). Once a big organization becomes set in its ways change rarely happens.
what test?
You mention Wreck it Ralph as one of the several Disney movies brought up in this video, and that Disney films genereally do not have the same focus on the theme of characters or things becoming obsolete, but of all the Disney movies mentioned here, that one that features that same theme the most. In Wreck it Ralph, Turbo, the main villain, his entire motivaiton was the fear of becoming obsolete, that's what drove him to escape his own game, and begin taking over other games as a virus in the arcade. Interesting how arguably the best example of this theme (character afraid of becoming obsolete) from Disney has said character being a villain, but in many of the Pixar films, this is the problem facing and often, motivating, the protagonist.
Yeah, I think you're right here. Disney films sometimes do have characters who are desperate to reclaim their former roles. Ariel's father wants to go back to having a dutiful, happy daughter. The beast wants to go back to being a prince. Maui wants to regain his former power and be thought of as a hero again. It is interesting that none of these characters are the protagonists of their films. They exist as a compliment to the protagonist, a protagonist who constantly strives for a new, better, different role.
Sarr Cat also Fix it Felix the game is going down and all the people are afraid in not being. Therefore being afraid of not being know. Plus Ralph wants to be a good but by the end he figures out that being Bad does not mean you are a bad guy. Coming off that is that Wreak it Ralph is all about coming to understand that you will change but not in the way you want.
@Greg Elchert Wreck-It-Ralph always felt like the most Pixar-like Disney film to me, this is probably why
Some Pixar movies also portray those who fear being obsolete as the villains. In A Bug's Life Hopper fears becoming obsolete via losing power over the ants. In Monsters Inc the villains are afraid of their sources of energy, their purpose, becoming obsolete as kids are less and less scared, so they concoct their scheme to steal children and harvest energy from them directly. With Randall a lot of it is purely sadistic, but for Waternoose the motivation to "KIDNAP A THOUSAND CHILDREN" is based on fear and the deluded belief that change is bad and preserving the status quo is the greatest good.
So... Pixar tells the story of Zuko and Disney tells the story of Katara?
Yes, and while I didn't mention it, Sokka is dreamworks.
that's just perfect
So, what's Aang?
Toph?
.... Iroh?
ThatBoringOne Iroh is Studio Ghibli, perhaps?
What do you mean when you say, "Sokka = Dreamworks"? A trashy inconsequential comedy that specializes in being funny, but remains shallow... most of the time?
What I really like about this video is that, where most analysis of Pixar focuses on how it manages to appeal to an adult audience, or how it finds emotional resonance with people of all ages, this focuses squarely on how Pixar hits home for children, the ostensible target audience of their work. Not to say Pixar isn't great for us older folk. Pixar has been, with a few exceptions, awesome for just about anyone who watches. But it's an angle that I feel has been underrepresented, and this video makes a great case for it.
Edgar Nackenson it seems that Pixar's fear of obsolescence theme is more relevant to adults. Now that I'm grown up I don't feel like I have a whole new world to explore. I'm there already and I'm happy in my role.
This man, edgar, he is my brother. I am proud of him for getting top comment.
Yeah, the case of moving especially as a kid is a lot harder to process than as an adult. For one, its not so much the choice of the kid as it is the parents, which isn't meant to sound bad, just kids don't really have the responsibility of taking care of stuff like that. I know especially as a kid the feeling of obsoleteness in terms of going away from a place I had grown used to and moving to a place I had no prior emotional or social connections to. I think also think with adults, they can at least understand and know what they're going through. When you're a kid, you're going through those emotions for the first time, at least making sense of them can be overwhelming.
@@BigJoel Wholesome as hell
Aren't Disney and Pixar kinda like the saying:
Change what you can't accept and accept what you can't change.
Accepting something is like changing something within yourself, whereas changing what you can't accept is more like having an external influence.
Also all that obsolete talk reminds me of The impermanence of things, one of the three marks of existence in Buddhism.
Your Insideout argument was very weak. I think referencing obsolete memories would’ve made more sense. Thats the entire subplot of the imaginary friend.
oh fuck off pretending like inside out made any effort in telling the story from the perspective of the actual protaganist (you konw, that one blonde girl that starts acting like a brat all of the sudden, for all those arbitrary reasons that pixar tells us are artisitic and super deep)
Let's be very clear here: That particular subplot was in there because Pixar never forgot how much money they made from toystory. And Inside Out was a mediocre and lazy cashgrab.
How much shit will Pixar put out, before people finally take off their Pixargoggles?! Do we really need to get to 'Cars 10' and 'Toy Story 15' here...
Frank Egle you okay bud?
yeah, the venting defently did help. I'm just afraid that I won't get far before stumbling over the "Pixar is the second coming of Christ" mentality yet again, so whose to say really^^
Great job by the way deflecting my arguments by putting the integratiy of my persona into question. Like im totally convinced now that you own the moral high ground just by the way you put me down. Great logic there
If you think Riley was underdeveloped with her mood swings you've never met a preteen child, lol
Frank Egle lol thank you 😅
The inside out one sounds like grasping at Straws: especially when you consider that Riley is growing out of her childhood. Joy no longer holds the same roll she used to. Bingbong and a lot of childhood memories are becoming obsolete. It's there, but you focused on the control panel
Inside Out has so many layers. To view it as one dimension in that the control panel is obsolete is wrong, yes. However, to overlook what that old control panel represents is also wrong. The old control panel is her childhood. You can make just as strong of a point that her childhood is obsolete, but it would be so long winded. His theory is far more prominent and easy to explain in other films, such as up and toy story. Inside out is a rarity in that it hosts multiple intertwining story lines, much like great films such as Dunkirk, Pulp Fiction and Snatch. They all share the multiple story line narrative but none, i don't think anyway, are as tight as between Joy's story and Riley's. It is a film that is so clever before you even look at the delivery of the film. It is a winner straight of the bat, the perfect elevator pitch. So complex yet easy to watch that to begin to analyse on any kind of deeper level is a huge, huge task. I think that's why he chose to go for something simpler and that got his point across for this essay in a much more punctual way.
Omg, yes. I mean why the control panel? Joy is getting obsolete and you focused on a goddamn control panel?!
@@jeromealday614 i can’t imagine being angry at big joel
Disney is the optimist
Pixar is the realist
Both are necessary in life.
Exactly. You watch a Disney movie when you feel down on your luck and need someone to give you a hug and tell you not to give up. You watch a Pixar movie to understand where you are right now, and what to do about it.
Totally! This made me think of a quote from modern family:
“There are dreamers and there are realists in this world. You'd think the dreamers would find the dreamers and the realists would find the realists, but more often than not the opposite is true. You see, the dreamers need the realists to keep them from soaring too close to the sun. And the realists, well without the dreamers, they might not ever get off the ground.” -Cam, s03e09 modern family
I'd Argue Dreamworks is the Optimist.
@@renaigh dreamworks is just the deviant
Ghibli is awesome
Oh wow, this made me cry. (These movies all make me cry, too, haha.) But those themes you talked about resonate with me immensely. I don't think they're just themes in children's lives, but for all of us throughout our lives. And they're such worthwhile themes to explore over and over again. Terrific analysis!
That's the dream, makin you cry
That was what I loved about Up and Inside Out.
The video was close to making me cry too... then I noticed, and stopped before I could watch the last minute. Maybe I'll watch that last minute when I become the kind of person who could handle that. (In other words, never! My evil plan is all according to itself! Bwuahahaha! ... hopefully watching most of it still counts as a view for you, Big Joel.)
ah gay!
Shut yo sensitive ass up
Ratatouille had a Disney like format
Jim Le good point 🤔
But Ratatouille also has the big epic
I think Ratatouille uses both. The main protagonist, Remy, follows the Disney formula of wanting something and going for it. But virtually every other character in the film deals with the fear of obsolescence, and Remy's character arc is specifically designed to bring out those fears in the other characters, from his dad who's afraid of his way of living becoming obsolete compared to his son to the head chef who hates Remy and Linguini for making his cooking methods obsolete. Even the other protagonists are affected by this, Linguini for example is insecure of the fact that all of the cooking he is being praised for is actually being done by a rat and fears becoming obsolete if the truth ever gets out. Every source of conflict in the film is based on the contrast between Remy's character arc and everyone else's.
I actually haven't seen Ratatouille in years but writing this out made me want to watch it again. Thank you for coming to my TEDTalk
@@chuckbatman5 👏👏
this is really solid man
love your cartoons man
Wow very funny to see you talk to big joel
The protagonist has something. Then loses it. Then wants to get it back. But get something new instead (Pixar)
In writing we call it Want vs Need. What the characters _want_ form their motivations, it's the thing that makes them act. What the characters _need_ is whatever brings their character arcs to a conclusion. These don't have to be the same thing, and making them different things is a neat trick for making the story feel less predictable and more poignant.
Disney does this as well: What Aladdin wants is to turn into an awesome prince so he can marry Jasmine. What he needs is to stop pretending he's something he's not and be true to himself, otherwise whatever life he has with Jasmine is a lie.
It's more that Pixar goes for this very consistently and uses the fear of growing obsolete to give the character very strong wants and emphasizing the character growth resulting in getting what they need.
@@RelativelyBest yeah, This my outline when writing video game characters.
This is an exceptionally good theory. While I've seen many theories about how Pixar creates meaning in its films, I very rarely see it connected to the oft-forgotten underlying purpose: that Pixar is in essence making films for children. It certainly reshapes my understanding of the Pixar ouvear. I wonder if this dealing with obsolescence has any connection with Pixar as a company, perhaps as a bunch of guys using a new style of animation that no one could be sure would remain a force in movie making or was just a fad that would quickly become obsolete? Either way, nice job!
Yes! I had that same thought about their history as a company. It's even more interesting to look it at now, with Pixar 3D animation being the new and 2D animation becoming "obsolete"
Wait, you mean Up is longer than 15 minutes?
I just assumed those were closing credits I was sobbing over uncontrollably for the next several hours.
Very insightful! You make some great points, and I admire your ability to see the big picture. We need more thoughtful commentary about animated storytelling here on RUclips - I would love to collaborate with you sometime!
thanks for watching, I'm not sure what you mean by collaborate, but your channel seems cool, so if u have any ideas, let me know.
I think these two messages/themes not only don't contradict each other, but also thrive alongside each other. You're not powerless; there are things you can do to change your world and you should pursue your dreams because they *can* come true. But while you're not powerless you're also not all-powerful, and things are going to change and to happen outside of your control. And maybe not every dream will come true. But you'll still be okay. Because whether you're in a position to change your circumstances or not, a power you *always* have is to make a place, a role for yourself in what does happen.
Those two types of stories come together into one message about growing up and, really, life in general.
Let's be honest : using Wall-E's soundtrack is the best idea in the world. It's such a masterpiece of a creation, perfectly completing the wholeness of Wall-E.
I'd argue, also perfect for the topic.
Pretty decent video man. Keep up the good work.
Zentagon man+
An astute observation on his part.
I've always noticed how content and better I've felt with my life after watching a Pixar movie
I'm glad you threw in that last 3--5 minutes cause you were coming off as very anti Disney.
You could argue that Ralph in Wreck-it Ralph ends the movie happy in the role he was given instead of somwhere new. It's just that the people around him have learned to apreciate his role and he learns to accept himself and not pretend to be something he isn't. Just a thought.
Nah.
Pixar is about epiphanies.
Disney's more about discoveries.
One external, the other internal.
Disney's premise is essentially childlike,
Pixar is more pragmatic & thus appeals to adults too
who have had to learn to change too.
While I find Disney and Pixar's storytelling methods to be equally good, Pixar films will most likely leave a bigger impact on children, as well as adults, because the fear of being obsolete and irrelevant is more universal and adds realism to their films, even ones that involve anthropomorphic cars, as well as the understanding that not all changes are evil, and sometimes there are things in life you can't control. It doesn't pander or talk down to an audience, not to say Disney does, but some of their films do display elements of retconning for that old happy ending. Then again, Disney has been around a lot longer than Pixar, so there's obviously going to be some dud movies.
I hate, and always have hated, Pixar films. They are boring. Really really really uninteresting. Maybe it's because I have asperger's, but I cannot project anything humane into the characters in pixar. They are toys! Or cars! They are things! I don't give a crap about some toy who worries if it will be useful in the future. It's a freaking toy. And the animation... People look creepy. Especially in toy story. Those people look freaky as f***. Dead eyes o.O
I did like the incredibles. One of my favorite movies of this genre. But that is disney/pixar collab so that might explain it... I'm actually really looking forward to the sequel.
I have always wondered what is with pixar, that I just can't bring myself to like any of their movies. Maybe it's because protagonist are mostly inanimate things?
I didn't like Up either, because the whole premise of the story is so cliché. Old man left alone, losing his house and all that. The adventure part wasn't really exciting either. Talking dogs were just stupid. Only interesting part was the antagonist, even tho his backstory was weird and questionable. How old is Munz? How the hell did he survived decades in the forest middle of nowhere. Doesn't make any sense. But he did make the movie a little bit interesting.
Well, the thing is, kids, especially at a young age, tend to connect more with toys, dolls or some other kind of inanimate object, cause they're still learning about the fundamentals of the real world, which can be a tough and confusing, and they're a lot more imaginative and expressive around those ages. I mean, chances are when you were a kid, you probably had an attachment to some object that you couldn't quite comprehend and now find it to be silly.
That's essentially what Pixar taps into in terms of environment, and in terms of writing, I don't think they're trying to say that toys, cars, monsters, etc. are people too, but rather trying to offer a different perspective on a universal topic/issue, like how Toy Story 3 and Inside Out tackle the issues of growing up, but from the point of view of toys and emotions, respectively, like how "they" would react to these certain situations, or what a superhero going through a mid-life crisis would look like, or what a monster going to college would be like. It's at least something to speculate about, then again, it doesn't always work, such as a movie starring anthropomorphic cars, which is just silly.
As for the animation, I think it only looks creepy when they try to make the people look too real. Pixar doesn't do that, which is one thing I admire about them. I do agree that the people in Toy Story look very odd, but to be fair, it was the first CGI animated movie and the technique itself was still evolving. They've come a long way since then.
I'm not trying to infringe on your opinions or anything, but I'll just say, Pixar films run more on emotional logic than, well, actual logic, and by this point, every possible story premise had been done before, hell the "toys coming to life" premise had been done many times before Toy Story. It's the unique ways in which Pixar chooses to tell theses stories that make them very memorable to both kids and adults. But if you already know that and still can't connect to them, that's fine, at least for me.
1717Dave Yeah I get it and I do understand why people love these movies. They are good movies, I am just unable to relate to them.
I don't really remember any of the toys I had when I was kid. Except the huge pink house made for barbies. But what I liked most about it was the fact that I could organize all the little items in it. It had a bathroom with bathtub, and with it came little mirror, brush and hairdryer and shelves to put them in. But I don't remember how I played with it with my barbie dolls. I guess I just stuck em in the bathtub and tried different clothing on them. I didn't ever have any dolls that had their own personalities. They were just pieces of plastic. When I played with my friends they always came up with the personalities.
Oh and I had a remote controlled car. I loved it. It was fun to just drive it, see what kinda terrain is good for it, trying to drive it through obstacles... Boys' toys were always way cooler :D
Nope, I have never worried about being useful at one point and then becoming obsolete. Maybe that's because I went from being a child, to a mentally ill teenager, to a physically ill adult and have, by society's standards, always been obsolete. Being a bisexual disabled woman, progress in general and particularly in my lifetime has been a unanimously good thing for me. I can't connect to being a middle aged man who's sad because other people are allowed to succeed.
well, I tend to like Pixar movies, but don't love them to the degree that many seem to. like I can appreciate them but ultimately they aren't as interesting to me as other things... although I'm not quite in a state of mind right now to unpack why they don't necessarily do it for me atm
*Mother:* That's all the sweets you're getting for the night!
*Disney Princess:* I WANT MOOOOOOOOORRRRRREEEEE!!!!
inside out also has bingbong! who totally becomes obsolete in riley's life after she grows up a bit
You pronounce "Ariel" weirdly. Haha good video, bro!!
I don't think you should compare Cinderella to Moana or Little Mermaid. Cinderella's story can be very powerful for those that had experience abuse and how they got themselves freed with hope and hard work. Another good thing about Cinderella is that her kindness does pay off when she selflessly helps others in need. They are very different companies with different approaches but they are both needed in order to keep that child within you alive for adulthood. Disney letting your imagination inspire you. Pixar understand that everything has a meaning in life both bad and good. But I like how you summed up your thoughts at the end of the video. So well done.
SlingShot: Please note that they stayed closer to the original fairytales in earlier times. The story of cinderella (French and German stories) is about a girl who is faithful and what you would expect from a good christian woman (cleaning, fulfilling your duty) and she goes to her mother‘s grave and prays and that‘s why she was „rewarded“ with a silver dress growing on the tree. The intention of the original stories always was to be „good“ and a faithful devout Christian. They didn‘t stay close to the original story of The Little Mermaid from Denmark where she actually doesn‘t (!) get the guy (Yes, he wanders off with the other girl) and she then commits suicide but she ends up becoming foam and her soul goes to heaven because she was a good and faithful girl. The stories actually say: No matter how hard life gets and no matter how much you suffer...being good and religious will „save“ you. Many people in Europe had parents who read the actual stories to them. I grew up with the actual stories in books.
@@denisenova7494 Um no, The moral lesson of Little Mermaid is " Don't sacrifice everything for a guy because you probably die miserable. " At least that's what my parents told us....
Jerome Alday: Well, that‘s not true :) This story is religious and about virtue and going to heaven.
Yes! I would also add that in Disney there’s often a magical/quick solution that falls short and it’s up to the character to demonstrate their inner strength to overcome their final obstacle, this is where we see real character development. Cinderella for example attempts to defy the abusive family with help from her friends (also survivors or kind beings that she’s shown kindness) only to be undermined and attacked. The magical dress gets her to the dance, but what gives Cinderella her ultimate escape is the final decision to defy her abusers by revealing the original shoe. It shows she is not only worthy of the one night of freedom, but willing to finally step into her own life outside their control.
About 4:11-5:11> That's because the "I want" song is part of the standard formula for musicals. As of 2017 Pixar had never done a full-blown musical. I understand the point you're trying to make but comparing musicals to dramas undermines the rest of your thesis. It's sort of like complaining about a car that doesn't have sails.
Dramas and musical typically deal with paradigm shifts in different ways. Rather than finding something new and better for new and better's sake, dramas revolve around some crisis breaking the world and the "hero" having to discover a way to put it back together. If not the way it was, then at least in some kind of livable "new normal".
One of the main reasons why Pixar has stayed out of musicals is fear of treading on the domain of "Mickey the All-Consuming" and provoking The Great Shai Hulud of All Mass Media into jumping genres.
I'd be really interested in your take on how to make effective dramas about desire and effective musicals about loss. There's probably a good reason why you almost never see any of either. But _Breaking Bad_ sure made bank!
Grizabeebles this is a general structure but not every musical follows this formula. Though even the non musical Disney films do follow this formula - Bolt, Atlantis and Treasure Planet for example.
I watched this video essay shortly before giving Ratatouille a rewatch after a number of years and being able to develop a finer appreciation for the film (not to mention Brad Byrd's phenomenal work, as per usual.) My big thought while watching the film was, "Well this is Pixar, and it could be one of the few films where the character is looking for change rather than a force adjustment to it." But after thinking about it, I realized that every character within the film is the representation of Pixar's obsession, disregarding the main character. The main chef is fearful his position will be compromised, Linguini goes through so many hyperbolic scenarios to ensure his life remains constant and he is not put into uncomfortable situations, and almost every character has this same theme. An important aspect I've always appreciated about Pixar is their focus on side characters and those minor details. Obsolescence doesn't have to be the main story line, but Pixar will ensure it's utilized just about everywhere else. And it really is something to give props too, their attention to detail is and always has been impeccable.
The thing about inside out at the beginning is kind of a stretch
But in Coco, at the beginning he has a history but doesn’t like it, wants to change, like a Disney character, but then realizes that that might not be best for him, and he goes back to where he was at the start, but different, and even changes his family’s attitude a bit
huh yeah, this video was made before Coco, but I do think you're right that it doesn't fit my mold super well.
One has to admit though, that it does follow the formula of want more - get more. Did he get all of what he wanted? Well... kind of. His “more” was a family who accepted his music. What did he do to get more? Stole a guitar to play in a music contest. What happened at the end? He got more- his family enjoys music.
Even side or complementary characters got their more. The dad got his family back, and is remembered now, so he won’t die (his more was wanting more than being forgotten).
This was not them having a role and changing that role , though it could be argued as such. It was more not having a role and then being able to attain that role.
Though there is an interesting caveat that I’ve found in almost all Disney villains - Cocos villain is afraid of being obsolete.
If this had been made after Coco I think there would have been an interesting opportunity to look at Bing Bong (from Inside Out) and Hector's shared fear of being forgotten as a newer way in which Pixar is approaching obsolescence. Those two movies do something similar in that, unlike older Pixar movies that deal with machines and physical things that would be left to rot if they became useless, they both take place in a metaphysical realm where no longer serving a purpose basically means no longer existing, which gives the threat of obsolescence even higher stakes.
I like Pixar movies more since Disney movies seem somewhat monotonous. Pixar makes its movies in a very wide spectrum and albeit in a relatively same format, they still make great movies Like UP, Wall-E, Cars, and more. I guess the base of why I love their movies is because I can relate to them, and I think a whole lot of other people can too, and that's what makes them so powerful.
Really nice job with this essay! There is definitely a wistfulness that exists in a lot of Pixar's work and this is a good rundown on why. Always felt like Toy Story 3 was kinda the linchpin of their obsession/examination of the obsolete, being a culmination of the first two films, as well as the two films that immediately preceded it (WALL-E and Up). I feel like the post-Toy Story 3 movies leaned a little less on this angle.
Anyway, great video. Kudos!
Ah now i see why alot more people enjoy pixar films
Even if they dont realize it
Toy story 4 came out this year and it fits nicely in this theme
Steve Jobs wanted to invest in Pixar so that generations of children would be accepting of obsolescence, which also happens to be the core business strategy of Apple Inc.
damn, how have i never realized this? im rarted
I think the depiction of Sadness speaks to this theme greater than the panel, the idea that it is seen as a useless emotion by Joy until the end
"basic childhood fears"
Haha, yeah, good thing I outgrew those exact fears, right? *Right?*
I'm so glad my parent's played my brother and I more Pixar than Disney growing up.
I see where you're going with this and I agree with most of it, but it's a little too general. We have outliers in both Pixar and Disney, like Ratatouille and Treasure Planet, wherein the former's protagonist has a want that he then gets by the end, and the latter's protagonist has a want that he DOESN'T but has instead changed because of the want of it. It's also a little misleading to show a clip of "Aladdin" singing "There's so much more" when he's talking about the way people perceive himself, not that he dreams of a life in the castle (though he does eventually get that too, dreams come true and all). The bigger picture, at least in the modern age, is that Disney is FEEDING that "I want more" narrative with I Want Songs in every single musical (a trope is generally seen as cliche in Broadway terms) because they're also a multibillion dollar corporation that makes and sells toys and products based on the stories they want to tell (The Little Mermaid, for example, was intentionally modeled around selling the soundtrack as well as the film). Pixar IS Disney now, the two companies are unavoidably interlaced, but Disney intentionally influences their movies to sell more toys, whereas Pixar still has the creative freedom to do or not do this same thing (hence Cars). That's my two cents, anyway. This was an interesting watch and I'll have to think on it more.
Yeah, the Aladdin clip bothered me. The whole quote was "There's so much more to me," meaning he's talking about who he already is and not what he doesn't have.
I really agree with you. People often critisize Disney for only telling fairy tales, but there is nothing wrong with being a fairy tale, a dream like thing. Walt Disney wanted remind adults their childhood innoncence. He even says "When our child like innocence dies, we become evil." I love both studios. Being fun is a reason to exist for a product. Bringing people happines, reminding their childhood is a reason to exist. A theme doesen't make a movie good or bad. Disney and Pixar is different but both of them are good in their ways.
But everything aside, Pixar should start making original movies again.
Ironically, they don't only telling fairy tales.
The rest okay..... But to include "inside out" just because the control painel change was too forced.... You would have better associated with the point that "inside out" is about old [core] memories and old ways to feel about them being obsolete.... also, pixar is all about old-into-new in wich every film deals with how to change old into new.
Very interesting observation. I'm just realizing this actually explains something I've noticed a while ago regarding Disney and Pixar. I've long come to see Toy Story as a redemption story for Snow White's antagonist. They both have similar premises of a character in a position of prime learning that a new face on the scene stands to usurp them, to which they attempt to hijack this newcomer from taking their place and making them obsolete. The main difference is that Snow White focuses on the younger, wide-eyed character, and lets the audience experience coming into their own with this character, while Toy Story focuses on the the original top-dog, and lets the audience experience the feeling of being threatened with this character (followed by a redemption arc, of course, because American G movies tend not to do tragedy). This totally exhibits all the nuances in theme you just described. Interesting that you made sense of it.
Strangely enough, I actually recall a video which argues nearly the opposite of what you said - it claimed that Disney, particularly before its CGI movies, was against change and progress, whereas CGI films like Pixar supported them. It cited trends such as 2D-animated Disney movies often having a happy ending where things return to how they were before (such as the monarchies of Triton, the Sultan of Agrabah, and Mufasa being returned from the hands of a deviant usurper), whereas CGI movies such as Pixar movies more likely have a happy ending where things change and move on (see laughs replacing screams in Monsters Inc., for instance). I guess Disney does have a shade of bourgeois-ness which is a tad strange odd considering Disney's existence as an all-American company which one would expect to be totally for progress and growth. I guess one could, to borrow an apt phrase from Jack Saint, call Disney's canon White Roses with varying degrees of Red Paint. Though, that might be a bit of a questionable dismissal considering the obvious pro-progression trends you've demonstrated.
And really, this makes me wonder if A Bug's Life is the un-favourite for a lot of Pixar fans because it goes against this theme - it centres around an innovative protagonist who wishes to expand his role in life, and proceeds to do so. I guess that makes a lot of people see it as just a product of Pixar's early floundering to truly find its footing and take root into its proper niche, but its divergence is actually probably what makes me like it - most of the other Pixar movies of its time starred big, beefy heroes who versed wily gadgeteers threatening to push them into obsolesence with their tech. A Bug's Life's doing the opposite balanced Pixar's early canon out in a way I found nice. Plus, it's a bit nice to have a break from themes of helplessness, which could borderline on depressing if thought of too deeply - really, it's a bit ironic that one of A Bug's Life's most outstanding motifs was imagining a pebble as a seed; by the end of that story, all the protagonists proved themselves to be genuine seeds full of potential for growth which they exhibited throughout the story. Dot was able to spread her wings and fly, while Buzz was never so lucky. That's another theme of Pixar I'd love to hear you expand on - it's always made me kind of curious that I found Monsters' University to be much more frustrating, unsatisfying and borderline depressing than Toy Story, despite Buzz and Mike both ending up similarly learning they are incapable of achieving their goals. Maybe that's not how you see it, and maybe it's just a product of my age making me more critical of the newer movies, but it is something that would be interesting to ponder.
Woah, this quite very long... I only read the first two paragraphs, and yeah I agree with you about the Snow white redemption arc
I’ve always though Disney was for a younger child and Pixar was for an older child. When we’re younger children we want wish fulfillment, when we’re older children we want wish reassurance.
im starting to appreciate both sides more
but sometimes Disney can't let go of they're greatest hits and decided to continue the live action shtick, i wounder if Pixar is trying to say something to Disney in a way.
I think another way to look at the core differences is through the lens of the hero's journey. In a Disney film, there isn't really a refusal of the call. The characters want adventure from the beginning, like you said they want "more". The transformation is usually an external one like with Aladdin moving up in the social hierarchy. In Pixar the drama is the refusal of the call and characters are unwillingly in their situation. The transformation is also usually internal; at the end of Toy Story, Buzz is still there, but Woody is no longer threatened.
You know that movie nobody watched? The good dinosaur? I saw a clip of it in the beginning and it kind of had that feeling of obsolete. At least what I remember of it. See, the main dinosaur was struggling to help his family and felt obsolete compared to his father. Something like that.
Aw man Cars was great. So sad when he was launched into space and left to float for eternity eventually stopping thinking :(
Wow. Really great breakdown of Disney and Pixar story philosophy. You definitely touched on it, but there's a meta narrative in there as well, such as how hard John Lasseter worked to bring forth 3D at Disney. As he saw the future in it. Even Brave Little Toaster, which he worked on, made heavy use of the 'going obsolete' theme. Also the idea that Disney never stops growing and getting more for itself is kinda interesting to think about.
There studio cultures are also similar from my understanding.
Dang. I haven’t realized that Disney animation is obsessed with their characters wanting more. Good observation.
That was very insightful :)
Out of all the Pixar fan theories, this one makes the most sense. Hey wait, does that mean that Cars 2 wasn't so well-loved simply because it dared to go against the theme of feeling obsolete? That would certainly make it Pixar's ballsiest sequel. Joy wasn't afraid of becoming obsolete. In fact, Sadness was the only emotion she had a problem with. If anyone feared becoming obsolete, it was Sadness and/or Bing Bong.
But the Evil Queen Grimhilde feared aging, becoming obsolete. Maui feared becoming obsolete. Geppetto's desire for a son may have stemmed from feeling obsolete. King John feared becoming obsolete. Scar feared his own obsolescence. The Great Wall may have made Shan Yu feel obsolete. Mushu himself feared becoming obsolete, especially in the DTV sequel. Yzma feared obsolescence, hence why she had a habit of ruling behind Kuzco's back. The Agent and Director from Bolt feared their TV show becoming obsolete. Ralph himself basically had a mid-life crisis. In other words, he feared becoming obsolete. Additionally, venturing into the great unknown actually did more harm than good, though I'm not sure that was intentional. Hans himself felt obsolete and for good reason. With the amount of brothers he had, there's no way he could really get anything. He's not even a spare.
Obsolescence isn't relatable to kids. It's truly relatable to adults. Pixar deals with adult fears more than childhood fears. Thrown out the window? If anything, Pixar does the same thing Disney does but in a different way.
I wonder, on kind of a meta level, how much this fixation on obsoletism started with the fact that Pixar made hand-drawn animation obsolete. Many of the people working on these movies loved that medium, had worked in it, and didn't intend for computer animation to become the only one that major studios used. But that happened, and it happened because of their early successes. That will always be part of Pixar's legacy and it seems likily that that fact fed into the focus on the obsolete just as much as being a counterpoint to Disney's themes did
This makes me think of how obvious it is that Brave (Pixar) and Wreck it Ralph (Disney) were conceived at one studio and developed at the other. in both films you can see influences of these two mentalities, a character wanting more in life but having to learn the hard way that what they were looking for is not what they truly needed. There is also a strong theme of obsolecence in Wreck it Ralph
Marvelous work. I wonder how Miyazaki films fit here. Probably a mix of the two, leaning towards Disney.
thanks so much, I actually have a Miyazaki video in the works.
Miyazaki strikes me as somewhat different, because the main characters in his movies rarely seem to get shunted off on adventure on the basis of some great and overriding want. A want is there, certainly, but the adventure is nearly a reflection of their inner selves instead of a force opposing their desires. Take Spirited Away for example. She starts out not really wanting to move, but moving anyway, same as in Inside Out. Inside Out spends its whole run time focusing on that problem in a variety of ways, but Spirited Away just kinda shunts Chihiro off into the unfamiliar, where she basically never talks about the move that started the movie. The spirit world is a fantastical metaphor for that problem, but it's never directly that problem.
Most Miyazaki movies are even less on this Disney/Pixar desire spectrum than that. What does Ashitaka desire at the beginning of Princess Mononoke that drives anything? To not die to a demon arm? If anything, that itself acts as metaphor and measure for the various conflicts that happen later, and as a macguffiny instigating incident. It has no resonance on its own, except in that it somewhat arbitrarily forces him to leave home. Howl's Moving Castle operates similarly, with age modification as instigating incident with some metaphorical value. My Neighbor Totoro doesn't even have much of an adventure as we would typically define it. All in all, I think there's value to the comparison, but I'm not sure that this particular analysis applies to Miyazaki films.
Spirited Away was already such a Pixar movie, that when Pixar tried to replicate it, they instead made their most Disney movie Coco
with pre cars quality and consistency of pixar
@@tvsonicserbia5140 Actually, Pixar's most Disney movie is Ratatouille which follows the Disney formula to a tee.
Thank you for making this video! I loved Pixar movies a lot more than Disney movies, but I was never able to understand why until I watched this, because I'm the type who relishes smelling the roses or holding onto nostalgic relics than constantly craving for change and adventures
Joel, this was an amazing video. I love these types of videos that look in depth when talking about movies and movie studios. You made a very valid argument and made me notice Pixar's similar plots along with Disney's. I look forward to watching more videos like this in the future. Good work 😀
thanks so much
This was a wonderful video essay. I love Big Joel’s longer form content, don’t get me wrong, but he really is unmatched when it comes to short and sweet essays IMO.
Interesting. But how would films like Finding Dory, Cars 2 or The Good Dinosaur fit within this thematic structure? In each of these films, a character is less coming to terms about the changing nature of their landscape and more or less recognizing their own faults and shortcomings in order to improve themselves. FD's mantra of "Rescue Rehabilitation and Release" is antithetical to obsolescence since it's directly positing a need for self growth to eventually leave the confines of security. Good Dinosaur's symbolic footprint falls more within the Disney "I want more" and the need to prove one's self worth. And in Cars 2, Mater has to come to terms with his abject stupidity to become a true hero.
In each of these films its less the rapidly updating word thats the instigating force and more self reflection that these characters are pushing themselves towards.
Hmm, yeah, I agree. Those movies don't fit well with this narrative of obsolescence. I guess I was pointing more to a general pattern more than I was making absolute statements.
Actually, you two, the villains in Cars 2 are cars that have been cast off by the rest of society for being obsolete.
Mater, as the protagonist, is the medium between the society and the Lemons.
He's a tow truck that still functions well (as a character and as a worker), but age has made him a bit senile and grating. That's why society views him as a nuisance, and why the Lemons view him as just another oppressor.
I hope PIXAR doesn't lose itself now that DISNEY owns everything. Disney already hasn't done a 'great' film in about a few years. Its disappointing that a company which has a monopoly (DISNEY) would instead do nothing more than limited efforts instead of doing something extra ordinary.
Pixar is the studio that changed animation forever and grappled with how they made an entire expression of an artform obsolete in western cinema and Disney is the studio that latched onto this new 3D method because it’s useful and exciting-that next big thing they can reach out and accomplish. Pixar regrets. Disney projects.
Each studio has a very different history and the backbone of their existence echoes within their films’ themes. Pixar asked Disney “Why are you so determined to stay put?” And Disney replied “We never stay put.” Pixar changed the game and had to convince Disney it was beneficial to adapt. Then Disney left their expression of the artform behind. Now you have a Disney that’s willing to look back and criticize itself (as in Frozen). And now you have a Pixar that’s willing to look back at Disney (as in Coco) and appreciate what’s been left behind.
Animation is dead. Long live animation.
I think inside out is a good example of what you’re talking about but not for the same reasons you’ve given. I don’t think the obsolescence and fear of changes comes from decisions being made for you and the powerlessness of childhood but rather from being granted power as you age and gain more responsibility and independence and not trusting yourself to use it correctly. To have tools to achieve your goals and failing at obtaining them because you’re just a kid that’s been thrust into adulthood without being prepared or who doesn’t view themselves as “adult”. And I think Pixar tries to prepare us.
Disney has developed though. It used to be about people wanting something and then getting it (Snow White: her prince, Pinocchio: be a real boy etc.), now it' more about wanting something and then finding something different and unexpected. Quasimodo wants to spend one day "out there" and gets free of his tower for good, Elsa wants to suppress her powers but learns she can control them, Rapunzel wants to leave her tower and finds her family...
I just figured a funny coincidence/sychronicity with my life: When Disney had their Golden Renaissance with Princess movies in the early 90s I was a little kid (I was born when Arielle came out). Times changed and drawn animation became obsolete and the internet became a thing for everyone and this is when Pixar started their animated movies about getting older, becoming obsolete etc and this is when I just became a teenager.
Answer: Pixar is better than Disney
Lol jk guys, watch the end of the video
3:45 OHHHHHH that's why Pixar tickles our nostalgia... because its made to be nostalgic to anyone. the adults look back on their childhoods watching this, and the children get little hints of the past that stick with them as they come up from time to time.
I think the values and differences with these two ways of story telling is what makes movies where Disney and Pixar work together really shine. For a recent example, look at Coco- Miguel wants more. He wants to be a musician, and at the end, he gets that, though it also comes with the message of the importance of family, as the movie is incredibly focused on loved ones becoming forgotten, or obsolete. The way that these two themes work together is truly beautiful, with the main character understanding things in a new way that maybe isn't what they wanted in the beginning, but also being able to achieve their dreams.
Funny you should mention them being two sides to the same coin because they literally are. Disney has owned Pixar for quite some time now and so I think it is a way that the company can explore different ideas. Just like they bought Alliance/Atlantis in the 90s so they could release R rated and more mature content without hurting their children's brand.
I appreciate these two readings of these companies, but are you assuming Pixar isn't also speaking to its adult audience? I apologize if someone else asked this already. I haven't read through all the comments.
What about ratatouille? Prolly one of if not my favorite Pixar film and I can’t really think of any examples of something going obsolete. Maybe the rats old ways of eating trash turns obsolete with Remy interest in cooking, or people thought rats were obsolete in a kitchen to accepting but those are big stretches. If anything ratatouille follow the Disney formula, he didn’t want to live like the rest of the rats, remy wanted more so he got washed up in Paris and got the goal he wanted.
Pixar is better because they are alloud to do and say things that the squeaky clean Disney people arnt. Plus that perfect Diney world comes crumbeling down pretty fast if you reseach them a little. Well not 'them' ofcource, many people working for Disney are great artists and probably great people but Disney had to go thru some dark shit to get to where they are today.
i think that pixar's movies resonates and is loved by so many adults as well as children because their themes are not only geared towards children. The fear of change in actually present throughout our lives, from little children to old people who don't want to change. Disney, however, is more geared towards the particular theme of children wanting to take control of their life and grow up, which does not appeal to an adult audience as much.
I would be curious about your perspective on A Bug’s Life. It feels like the protagonists implicitly embrace change.
Could you please review "the Prince of Egypt"?
Well observed! May the distinction be connected to the different age group audiences? E.g. Pixar for more mature (family movie) in contrast to Disney pure children fairy tales?
I never thought about it that way, but Pixar really is a kind of anti-Disney, which almost makes it funny that Disney eventually bought them.
So, this is my third comment under one of your videos, and I know I’ve already expressed how great I think your work is, but I have to say it, again - this is really good work, dude! You really are so insightful. Each one of your videos has enabled me to see old products in a totally new way. That’s an amazing skill you have! You deserve way more subscribers. This really is one of the best RUclips channels I’ve come across. I mean, I only discovered you yesterday, and I’ve already subscribed, and liked/watched half a dozen of your videos! The interesting thing is that I’m often not particularly interested in the specific topic that you’re discussing, but you analyse each topic in such an interesting and creative way, that you manage to hold my undivided attention throughout the video...and now I’m thinking about these products in a totally new light (I still don’t want to see Cars 3 though, lol). Thanks for all the work you’ve put into this. I’d honestly be interested to hear you talk about any subject.
EDIT: Just had a thought after I posted this...can you think of any movies that are an amalgamation of the Disney and Pixar models? Like, a middle ground? And if not, what would that kind of movie look like?
I don’t think the panel in inside out was to be shown as obsolete. (in a since) But that it Riley has matured enough with her emotions that she is able to see the sweet and the sour at the same time. The old panel was made in the mind of a child, very straight forward and blunt. Only putting a memory in one category. But as she is wiser, she can see that she doesn’t need to block out those negative emotions. If anything, she can bring them out. I agree with you on almost everything besides this. But this is my opinion
I think a better example in Inside Out was that it was Sadness' journey to find her own purpose in a group that think she's not just useless, but her presence harmful.
Wreck It Ralph is like related to Pixar because Ralph what's to become the good guy but realizes that if he does that then the whole system he's in gets unplugged. So in the end he learns to like being the bad guy because he what to do that for the whole game. So he wasn't afraid of that change that he felt in the end.
I like how you address Pixar and Disney as different but similar entities. Not many people get that and so many people i talk to say they're the same but that's not the case.
For inside out, the example of obsoletion was kinda weak. I feel like Bing Bong not being needed by Rylie anymore would’ve been much better
great new channel dude i saw this shared on fb by some guy i dont even talk to anymore. keep making great content and you'll be getting more subscribers soon i'm sure! :)
thanks!
hey ben rowe
hey! hope you're well.
Haha. The movie Coco on the other hand is about being forgotten in the afterlife.
myultumatum actually quite the opposite. It’s about being remembered forever. So there is that nagging plot line of want-more get-more.
And there is the main subplot of Wanting to be Accepted- which is definitely want-more get-more
"inside out got a new console and the characters moved on without a hitch, therefore pixar is obsessed with old shit"
you stretch more than slinky.
Disney is the conflict between Want X Need, Pixar is about the melancholy of changing.
And I went that whole video without crying! and you just HAD to go and stick 20 seconds of the Up opening! But seriously I did cry. I find it interesting how much I love Pixar films and yet the fears I express are these very fears, before Toy Story was released into theaters, I was a child that didn't want to grow up. Now as an adult I find a lot of comfort in the endings, that ever present reminder that things will change, but that's ok. I just never put that into perspective. I think it's even more pronounced in the Good Dinosaur, and in Coco.
"Change is nature" is something that Ratatouille covers as well
Outsiders have to do more to overcome ther condition.
How'd you pick the control panel as the example of obsolescence in Inside Out? Bing Bong's right there. Or did you forget about him too?
Hell, the whole plot revolves around the girl repressing her happiness and sadness to cope as if they're useless to her. I should do what you do, and you should wash my balls
Bing bong isn't important. I never cared for him
In some ways, this idea reminds me of the novelist Anne Tyler. Her most well-known book (which was adapted into a wonderful movie) was "The Accidental Tourist," which is (like all her books) about characters trapped into a single way of living, a single way of thinking, and a single way of doing things until something disruptive (usually a love interest, but not always) happens and makes them shift slightly. Her books are much more subtle in their shifts than Pixar characters, but she writes for a different audience. Great video!
You know, I never noticed that theme came up so much in PIXAR, but that would explain why I've liked them more consistently than Disney. For me, the stories seemed to resonate more and were very uplifting and encouraging, overall. Then again, I wasn't one of those "I can't wait to grow up!" kids. I didn't want to grow up and found it frightening. :')
I don't care what anyone says I'll always prefer Pixar over Disney.
“I’m not trying to sound pro-pixar and anti-disney” well i certainly am
I feel like Dreamworks is pretty similar since most of their movies are underdog stories