Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-25-2016, 01:22 AM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,270
Heresy.... Disney Animation better than Pixar?

The most recent 5 animated movies made by Disney Animation studios, along with Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB ratings, are:
Tangled (90, 7.8)
Wreck it Ralph (86, 7.8)
Big Hero 6 (89, 7.9)
Frozen (89, 7.6)
Zootopia (99, 8.4)

The most recent 6 made by Pixar are:
Toy Story 3 (99, 8.4)
Cars 2 (39, 6.3)
Brave (78, 7.2)
Monsters University (78, 7.4)
Inside Out (98, 8.3)
The Good Dinosaur (76, 6.8)

Is it heresy to suggest that Disney Animation Studios now makes better movies, on average, than Pixar?

Looking that those numbers a bit, I think it's remarkable how consistent Disney has been, which used to be Pixar's hallmark. The best of those movies (Toy Story 3 and Inside Out) are Pixar, but by far the worst (Cars 2) is also Pixar. Whereas everyone one of the Disney movies is at least solidly good, with the better ones bordering on great.


Thoughts?
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 03-25-2016, 01:47 AM
Terminus Est Terminus Est is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The tropics
Posts: 6,632
Disney now owns Pixar. John Lasseter is Chief Creative Officer for both Pixar and Disney Animation. Is there really any difference between the two?
  #3  
Old 03-25-2016, 02:40 AM
GuanoLad GuanoLad is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Where the wild roses grow
Posts: 23,314
Pixar's reliable formula is starting to get a bit creaky, and they haven't found a way to correct for that yet. They're also not trusting new Directors. They've replaced the Director midway through the making of movies three or four times now, and each time the end result hasn't been anything too great. I wonder if they'd kept them on would their original version actually have been better after all.

Disney's on a new formula, taking a couple of new risks with original ideas, and it's refreshing things for them again.
  #4  
Old 03-25-2016, 03:31 AM
Uosdwis R. Dewoh Uosdwis R. Dewoh is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,764
I'd argue that even Dreamworks has been doing better than Pixar with the How to train your dragon and Kung fu panda series. Besides Inside out, Pixar's movies lately have been, at best, just ok.
  #5  
Old 03-25-2016, 06:19 AM
NAF1138 NAF1138 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: North of Philly
Posts: 9,504
I'm going to agree that since Lasseter took over creative control at Disney Animation it's pretty much a distinction without a difference. They are all John Lasseter movies at the end of the day.
  #6  
Old 03-25-2016, 09:47 AM
bump bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 15,097
I'm not surprised that Disney would be better at it; they literally wrote the book on it. Moving into digital animation is merely a technological shift, but the fundamentals of writing a good story, pairing it with good music, and combining those with the right artwork is the same.

Makes sense, if you think about it. Disney literally has 82 years of institutional experience making feature-length animated films, many of which are hugely popular classics. Pixar, on the other hand, has maybe 21 years of experience making movies, and their main claim to fame was their genesis as a computer animation shop.

I suspect that eventually they'll probably consolidate the actual operations of Pixar and Disney Studios, and they'll position Pixar as a studio brand that specializes in subjects that aren't quite in the traditional purview of Disney Studios.
  #7  
Old 03-25-2016, 12:33 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 74,421
I feel Pixar has never recovered from the death of Joe Ranft. Ranft's title at Pixar was "head of story". The people actually making the movie tend to get too focused on details. Ranft was the guy who essentially stood back and looked to see if the overall movie was working. He would make sure all the details fit together.
  #8  
Old 03-25-2016, 03:40 PM
Bijou Drains Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,438
There is a free version of RenderMan which they both use to make their movies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RenderMan_(software)
  #9  
Old 03-25-2016, 04:15 PM
magnusblitz magnusblitz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,067
I agree that the main takeaway should be "they're both John Lassester's now" and the distinction is minimal at best.

That said, in the interest of trying another angle... I think Disney might shy a bit more towards making a "something for everyone" type movie that is more likely to do well by RT metrics. Remember that RT is just a % of who thinks it's "fresh" (over 60/100 rating). That means a movie that everyone thinks is "good" will score better than a movie that the majority thinks is "great" but a minority thinks is "bad." Pixar's movies can sometimes be a bit more "artsy" or "heavy message" (there are people out there who hate WALL-E because of the enviromental message). Though looking at the last few films, they're also suffering for making kiddie-aimed films like Cars and The Good Dinosaur.

(IMDB ratings aren't even worth using, IMO)

Last edited by magnusblitz; 03-25-2016 at 04:15 PM.
  #10  
Old 03-25-2016, 04:21 PM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,811
Heresy.... Disney Animation better than Pixar?

As an aside, are there any major release animated movies that are actually drawn? I just can't watch computerized renderings.

Last edited by Acsenray; 03-25-2016 at 04:22 PM.
  #11  
Old 03-25-2016, 05:30 PM
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 32,655
I think including Cars 2, which Pixar didn't really want to make but did it for the money, is not really fair. And I have a hard time believing Brave, which got rave reviews and everyone loved, should have gotten so low a score. Monsters U and The Last Dinosaur were much well less liked than Brave. I mean, Merida is a freaking Disney Princess now. She's iconic, and should be up there with Tangled.

Heck, I'm not sure Monsters U and The Good Dinosaur should have around the same score. Monsters U was liked but not favorably compared to its predecessor. The Good Dinosaur is just a film that didn't seem to go anywhere. Oddly, the IMDb scores seem better in distinguishing them, and those are usually shit.

Last edited by BigT; 03-25-2016 at 05:31 PM.
  #12  
Old 03-25-2016, 07:47 PM
magnusblitz magnusblitz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
And I have a hard time believing Brave, which got rave reviews and everyone loved, should have gotten so low a score.
You'd be surprised. For example, in this thread ranking Pixar films, the majority of people had Brave right in the middle or lower. (Yeah, Monsters U. is usually rated lower, but the point is that Brave wasn't universally loved)
  #13  
Old 03-25-2016, 08:09 PM
Yookeroo Yookeroo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Clemente, California
Posts: 4,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I think including Cars 2, which Pixar didn't really want to make but did it for the money,
Why do you think this? I find it hard to believe that Lasseter really didn't want to make Cars 2.
  #14  
Old 03-25-2016, 11:41 PM
Red Barchetta Red Barchetta is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 4,811
Not even a question. Disney is the new Pixar, which itself used to be the new Disney.

Pixar's been sliding in the last 10 years, while Disney's been hitting it out of the park since Tangled
  #15  
Old 03-26-2016, 12:12 AM
GuanoLad GuanoLad is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Where the wild roses grow
Posts: 23,314
I wonder if John Lasseter has a clearly stated idea of what differentiates a Disney film from a Pixar film.
  #16  
Old 03-26-2016, 01:20 AM
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 32,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yookeroo View Post
Why do you think this? I find it hard to believe that Lasseter really didn't want to make Cars 2.
That's just what everyone said back then. But apparently the guy himself came out and said it wasn't true.

Honest, but not very smart. It would've been better to let people think that.
  #17  
Old 03-26-2016, 02:42 AM
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 22,283
Cars made more money than all other Pixar movies put together, thanks to merchandising. There's no way the Disney overlords wouldn't demand another one.
  #18  
Old 03-26-2016, 10:23 AM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuanoLad View Post
I wonder if John Lasseter has a clearly stated idea of what differentiates a Disney film from a Pixar film.
Of the films listed in the OP, I think Frozen and Tangled are the most clearly Disney films, in that they are both basically the classic Disney formula dating back to Snow White... classic fairy tale brought to life, with songs.


I find it hard to imagine Disney making Inside Out or The Good Dinosaur. On the other hand, I wouldn't have thought they would have made Wreck it Ralph until they did.


Fortunately, in this case, we're all the winners, because there's that many more high quality animated movies being made, and that many fewer Ice Age sequels.
  #19  
Old 03-26-2016, 09:57 PM
Yookeroo Yookeroo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Clemente, California
Posts: 4,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Cars made more money than all other Pixar movies put together, thanks to merchandising. There's no way the Disney overlords wouldn't demand another one.
Yeah, but Cars is Lasseter's baby. I think he was always on board for the sequel. And the upcoming 3rd one. Now, Planes is the movie Disney made that Lasseter seems to have wanted no part of.
  #20  
Old 03-27-2016, 09:30 AM
RealityChuck RealityChuck is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Schenectady, NY, USA
Posts: 40,577
Aardman is better than the both of them. Here are their IMDB ratings:

Chicken Run (2000) (10)
Wallace & Gromit and the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) (10)
Flushed Away (2006) (10)
Arthur Christmas (2011) (7.1, though I'd give it a solid 10; it's certainly the best Christmas themed animated film, and one of the best Christmas films of all time)
The Pirates! Band of Misfits (2012) (9)
Shaun the Sheep Movie (2015) (7.4)
__________________
"East is East and West is West and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does."
Purveyor of fine science fiction since 1982.
  #21  
Old 03-27-2016, 10:02 AM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityChuck View Post
Aardman is better than the both of them. Here are their IMDB ratings:

Chicken Run (2000) (10)
Wallace & Gromit and the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) (10)
Flushed Away (2006) (10)
Arthur Christmas (2011) (7.1, though I'd give it a solid 10; it's certainly the best Christmas themed animated film, and one of the best Christmas films of all time)
The Pirates! Band of Misfits (2012) (9)
Shaun the Sheep Movie (2015) (7.4)
I'm not sure what numbers you're looking at. The IMDB rating for Chicken Run is 7.0.
  #22  
Old 03-27-2016, 12:50 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 38,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I think including Cars 2, which Pixar didn't really want to make but did it for the money, is not really fair. And I have a hard time believing Brave, which got rave reviews and everyone loved...
The reviews are objectively not "rave" by Pixar standards, as Rotten Tomatoes demonstrates.

I sure didn't love it.
  #23  
Old 03-27-2016, 01:39 PM
RealityChuck RealityChuck is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Schenectady, NY, USA
Posts: 40,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I'm not sure what numbers you're looking at. The IMDB rating for Chicken Run is 7.0.
must have been wrong on the list I took. OTOH, Its Rotten tomatoes score is 97%.

Four of their seven features has Rottentomatoes has scores over 90%, with Pirates just missing at 87.

Last edited by RealityChuck; 03-27-2016 at 01:39 PM.
  #24  
Old 03-27-2016, 04:57 PM
ekedolphin ekedolphin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Suffolk, VA
Posts: 3,691
I have high hopes for Finding Dory, so... stay tuned. You're not wrong, however.
  #25  
Old 03-28-2016, 12:34 AM
The Evil Prince Zorte The Evil Prince Zorte is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 298
It's also worth looking at the shorts, , because that is where they develop new talent. I think Disney has had the edge there as well.
  #26  
Old 03-28-2016, 11:22 AM
bump bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 15,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I think including Cars 2, which Pixar didn't really want to make but did it for the money, is not really fair. And I have a hard time believing Brave, which got rave reviews and everyone loved, should have gotten so low a score. Monsters U and The Last Dinosaur were much well less liked than Brave. I mean, Merida is a freaking Disney Princess now. She's iconic, and should be up there with Tangled.

Heck, I'm not sure Monsters U and The Good Dinosaur should have around the same score. Monsters U was liked but not favorably compared to its predecessor. The Good Dinosaur is just a film that didn't seem to go anywhere. Oddly, the IMDb scores seem better in distinguishing them, and those are usually shit.
I think part of the reviewing needs to look at the intended audience- was Cars 2 popular in the under-5 set? Probably so, and that's likely who it was intended to market to, not the adults who rate the movies on RT and IMDB. Same with Brave.
  #27  
Old 03-28-2016, 02:27 PM
Malthus Malthus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
No question, Disney has had a good period of creativity. Even the Disney TV shows have been good - or, in the case of Gravity Falls, better than good - it may be the best animated show for kids of the past decade or so.
  #28  
Old 03-28-2016, 03:49 PM
Daddypants Daddypants is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
As an aside, are there any major release animated movies that are actually drawn? I just can't watch computerized renderings.
The last hand drawn Disney feature was The Princess and the Frog, released in 2009.
  #29  
Old 03-28-2016, 06:03 PM
Chronos Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 72,168
Quote:
Quoth magnusblitz:

You'd be surprised. For example, in this thread ranking Pixar films, the majority of people had Brave right in the middle or lower. (Yeah, Monsters U. is usually rated lower, but the point is that Brave wasn't universally loved)
In the middle of most peoples' rankings of Pixar movies is a very good place to be, though. Even if they've had some duds, most folks agree that Pixar has had more good movies than bad, which would make the median Pixar movie a good one.
  #30  
Old 03-28-2016, 06:54 PM
RandMcnally RandMcnally is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
The reviews are objectively not "rave" by Pixar standards, as Rotten Tomatoes demonstrates.

I sure didn't love it.
Oh God, I hated that movie so much. I saw it in theaters and about half-way through I realized I wasn't going to get any less bored. So I just decided to pay attention to how pretty it was.
  #31  
Old 03-28-2016, 07:08 PM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
I think part of the reviewing needs to look at the intended audience- was Cars 2 popular in the under-5 set? Probably so
But most Pixar movies have managed to charm children and adults alike. For whatever reason, Cars 2, far more than any other Pixar movie, failed with adults.

It's certainly reasonable to judge Cars 2 with the same criteria we use to judge the other movies in this thread.
  #32  
Old 03-29-2016, 07:48 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 21,215
Count me in the "What's the difference, nowadays?" camp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthus View Post
No question, Disney has had a good period of creativity. Even the Disney TV shows have been good - or, in the case of Gravity Falls, better than good - it may be the best animated show for kids of the past decade or so.
It's great, but I'd put it only 4th (behind Adventure Time, Steven Universe and Avatar, if you're curious) - we are in a Golden Age of animated children's shows.
  #33  
Old 03-29-2016, 08:02 AM
Malthus Malthus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Count me in the "What's the difference, nowadays?" camp.


It's great, but I'd put it only 4th (behind Adventure Time, Steven Universe and Avatar, if you're curious) - we are in a Golden Age of animated children's shows.
I'd put it in the same camp as Avatar, which was great, but it has better animation and is overall more unique.

I did not care for Adventure Time (and neither did that ultimate critic, my kid. ). But that may just be because the humor in that show didn't appeal.

I look forward to watching Steven Universe, which I have not seen yet.
  #34  
Old 03-29-2016, 01:49 PM
garygnu garygnu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 11,029
Disney was better than Pixar when Pixar first hit the gate, but coincidentally started a big slump right when Pixar could do no wrong*. Now the shoe's on the other foot (again).

Other studios have copied what made Pixar good, siphoned talent. Pixar itself boosted output, further thinning the talent pool. Their best directors went off and made some ruefully terrible live-action movies. While Disney Feature Animation gets the advantage of playing with expectations.

*: The first Toy Story isn't as great as its reputation, and Bug's Life is derivative and boring. Although not as mind-numbingly dull as The Good Dinosaur is.
  #35  
Old 03-30-2016, 09:46 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 21,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygnu View Post
Disney was better than Pixar when Pixar first hit the gate,[...] The first Toy Story isn't as great as its reputation
Firstly, wrong.

Secondly, even if it were not as great as it is, it would still be better than Pocahontas, the Disney film that came out that same year.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:52 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017