Every since I became a huge Pixar fan after watching Ratatouille for the first time back in 2007, I've been keeping up with stories in the press about the studio and the people. After reading countless articles where the press rhapsodizes about the campus, people and their films over the past four years, I've started to wonder, how important is an animation studio's image when it comes to the success of their films? Would Pixar's films be less successful if there was a lot of negative stories written about the company? The general public may know their characters, but they probably don't know who John Lasseter is. I don't follow Dreamworks press, but do they invite the press onto their campus and have people talking about it and the people like Pixar do? The same question goes for Blue Sky and Illumination. I started to wonder what was the point of articles like the one done on Pixar recently in, I think it was, New York Magazine. As long as they make good movies that appeal to the whole family, are all of those fluff pieces nessesary? The people at Pixar makes it almost seems like it's a nirvana-esque place to make animated films. I know that if it isn't they an't speak the truth. But they say the same things over and over in interviews. But I've read that Disney keeps tight control over when it comes to the media and Pixar. But if a lot of negative stuff started appearing in the press about Pixar tomorrow, would it have an impact on Cars 2 box office results?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Does an animation studio's image matter when it comes to their fims being successful?
- Thread starter Mestizo
- Start date
My nickname here
New member
I can't speak for anybody else, but if certain things are being said about any company, I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt and hear their side of the story. Other than that, it really isn't that simple. I can't say for sure that I would avoid Pixar like the plague if it turned out that John Lasseter was a horrible person behind the scenes. Where Pixar (and by extension Disney) is concerned, that's not really the point.
I honestly wish I could give a better answer than that. All we can really do is hope for the best.
I honestly wish I could give a better answer than that. All we can really do is hope for the best.
marokigirl
New member
Expectations definitely factor in. I remember hearing how an animated film ( Thumbelina?) did better in test screenings where the Disney logo was spliced in at the beginning.
I'm really too lazy right now to post a long essay as to why this is exactly the problem with animation critique these days, but I'll just short form it and say that yes, I do think a studio's image gives them free passes with critics. Most people go into a Pixar movie KNOWING they will like it, based in no small part by the reputation they have. Even if a Pixar film hits a few wrong notes, most people's minds will process these flaws by spinning it as if they weren't flaws, or have some sort of deeper reasoning to them. I see that all the time in reviews today.
The same kind of thing was happening in the early 90s with Disney. There was a time during the 90s when every Disney film was a surefire classic, a hit a do-no-wrong effort. I know because I followed them closely those days and I was a fan--but even as a kid (and I was the target audience!) I could still see that critics were really drinking some kind of Disney kool-aid in those days. Of course, today people look at 90s Disney in a respectable light, but are much more measured in their views.
I wouldn't be surprised if 20 years from now, retrospective views on Pixar's 2000s run of films are more tempered.
The same kind of thing was happening in the early 90s with Disney. There was a time during the 90s when every Disney film was a surefire classic, a hit a do-no-wrong effort. I know because I followed them closely those days and I was a fan--but even as a kid (and I was the target audience!) I could still see that critics were really drinking some kind of Disney kool-aid in those days. Of course, today people look at 90s Disney in a respectable light, but are much more measured in their views.
I wouldn't be surprised if 20 years from now, retrospective views on Pixar's 2000s run of films are more tempered.
dormantsol
New member
Yeah, definitely agree there. It's the same with actors and directors, put a big name like Steven Spielberg on the project and many people will end up seeing the film.
With the amount of rep Pixar has built up, it would take quite a few years to bring them down to Disney's "Treasure Planet" level (In terms of box office).
Case in point when it comes to a company's image, whenever Pixar announces a sequel (Toy Story 3, Monsters Inc 2, Cars 2), people jump for joy and give them the benefit of the doubt if they have the slightest bit of uncertainty. Whenever Dreamworks announces a sequel (Kung Fu Panda, Madagascar), people call them money grabbers and a greedy, tiresome company, despite Dreamworks releasing some good films in the past few years and doing very well for themselves. I've kept up a bit with how Dreamworks functions when making stories and the artists they have on board and read most of their "Art of " books, and I really respect DW and how they roll. They've become my new favorite company and I get excited to see what they'll do and how well they'll succeed. It's almost kind of boring with Pixar, you expect them to succeed, it would be more exciting to actually see them make a stinker for once (Although I believe they already have with Cars, so many disagree with me and say, "It wasn't great, but it was good!").
But a lot of the mainstream wouldn't really go that far into researching companies and why they respect, they just tend to follow with what most people are saying. There are many people out there who will just listen to all the negative reviews of things and then have no interest to see it, but when asked about it, they'll say how bad the movie is without even having seen it, going only with what they heard in the reviews. It's become like that for Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks. Everyone will say Pixar is great, Disney lost their touch and is lame now, and Dreamworks only good film is "How to Train Your Dragon", even if they hadn't seen the movie.
On a side note, I also prefer DW because they've had a lot more humor in them as of lately while still giving us some emotional moments in their movies, as opposed to Pixar who's gone mostly in the "down in the dumps" road with making everything sad and quiet and lonely feeling.
With the amount of rep Pixar has built up, it would take quite a few years to bring them down to Disney's "Treasure Planet" level (In terms of box office).
Case in point when it comes to a company's image, whenever Pixar announces a sequel (Toy Story 3, Monsters Inc 2, Cars 2), people jump for joy and give them the benefit of the doubt if they have the slightest bit of uncertainty. Whenever Dreamworks announces a sequel (Kung Fu Panda, Madagascar), people call them money grabbers and a greedy, tiresome company, despite Dreamworks releasing some good films in the past few years and doing very well for themselves. I've kept up a bit with how Dreamworks functions when making stories and the artists they have on board and read most of their "Art of " books, and I really respect DW and how they roll. They've become my new favorite company and I get excited to see what they'll do and how well they'll succeed. It's almost kind of boring with Pixar, you expect them to succeed, it would be more exciting to actually see them make a stinker for once (Although I believe they already have with Cars, so many disagree with me and say, "It wasn't great, but it was good!").
But a lot of the mainstream wouldn't really go that far into researching companies and why they respect, they just tend to follow with what most people are saying. There are many people out there who will just listen to all the negative reviews of things and then have no interest to see it, but when asked about it, they'll say how bad the movie is without even having seen it, going only with what they heard in the reviews. It's become like that for Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks. Everyone will say Pixar is great, Disney lost their touch and is lame now, and Dreamworks only good film is "How to Train Your Dragon", even if they hadn't seen the movie.
On a side note, I also prefer DW because they've had a lot more humor in them as of lately while still giving us some emotional moments in their movies, as opposed to Pixar who's gone mostly in the "down in the dumps" road with making everything sad and quiet and lonely feeling.