As part of their classic comedy routine, “The 2000 Year Old Man,” Carl Reiner asked Mel Brooks what he attributed his amazing longevity to. To which Mel replied:
“I never, ever touch fried food. And I never run for a bus. There’ll always be another.”
I bring up Brooks’ bus joke for a reason. In that it reminds me of a rather delicate Pixar-related problem that the Walt Disney Company now finds itself dealing with.
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
To explain: Please take a look at the chart that I’ve compiled below. Which details the worldwide box office totals for every Pixar film that’s been released to date.
Film Title | Domestic Gross | Overseas Gross | Total |
“Toy Story” | $191.7 million | $170.1 million | $361.9 million |
“A Bug’s Life” | $162.7 million | $200.6 million | $363.3 million |
“Toy Story 2” | $245.8 million | $239.1 million | $485.0 million |
“Monsters, Inc.” | $255.8 million | $269.4 million | $525.3 million |
“Finding Nemo” | $339.7 million | $524.9 million | $864.6 million |
“The Incredibles” | $261.4 million | $370.0 million | $631.4 million |
“Cars” | $244.0 million | $217.8 million | $461.9 million |
“Ratatouille” | $188.2 million* | $50.8 million* | $239.1 million* |
* This film is still in theatrical release. Its box office totals have yet to be finalized
Please note this animation studio’s highest earning production to date was “Finding Nemo.” And that every Pixar production that has followed this Andrew Stanton movie then went on to earn significantly less than the picture that preceded it.
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Now I bring up this pattern because — if you’re familiar with your Walt Disney Animation Studios history — there’s actually a historical precedent for Pixar’s current predicament …
| Film | Domestic Gross | Overseas Gross | Total |
| “Beauty and the Beast” | $145.8 million | $206.0 million | $351.8 million |
| “Aladdin” | $217.3 million | $286.7 million | $504.0 million |
| “The Lion King” | $312.8 million | $455.3 million | $768.1 million |
| “Pocahontas” | $141.5 million | $204.5 million | $346.0 million |
| “The Hunchback of Notre Dame” | $100.1 million | $225.2 million | $325.3 million |
| “Hercules” | $99.1 million | $153.6 million | $252.7 million |
… In that once the Walt Disney Company committed to producing a new animated feature (And — in some cases — two new animated features) per year, the worldwide box office totals for the Mouse’s newer feature length cartoons began steadily dropping.
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Oh, sure. There were a few WDAS productions that bucked this trend …
| Film | Domestic Gross | Overseas Gross | Total |
| “Tarzan” | $171.0 million | $277.1 million | $448.1 million |
| “Dinosaur” | $137.7 million | $212.0 million | $349.8 million |
| “Chicken Little” | $135.3 million | $179.0 million | $314.4 million |
| “Mulan” | $120.6 million | $183.7 million | $304.3 million |
| “Lilo & Stitch” | $145.7 million | $127.3 million | $273.1 million |
| “Brother Bear” | $85.3 million | $165.0 million | $250.3 million |
… But these tended to be films that deliberately avoided the well established Disney Feature Animation template. Either by embracing a technology (In the case of “Dinosaur” and “Chicken Little,” CG) that then gave these movies a distinctly different look or (In case of “Tarzan“) by using some radically different source material.
Mind you, in the case of “Mulan,” “Lilo & Stitch” and “Brother Bear,” it was the studio itself (i.e. The late, lamented Walt Disney Feature Animation – Florida unit) that made all the difference. It was that talented group of artists & animators that actually worked onstage at Disney-MGM Studios that then came together to creat this truly entertaining trio of films. As the theory goes, these folks were far enough away from the suits back in Burbank that they could then develop animated features that had their own unique story sensibility.
Which — in theory — should also be the case up in Emeryville. But given that audiences today are clearly not responding to “Ratatouille” with the same enthusiasm that they once showed for “Monsters, Inc.” and “The Incredibles” … The people at Pixar are reportedly now wondering what they have to do in order to make their latest releases seem less like those buses that the 2000 Year Old Man referred to. In that you don’t have to really rush out and catch the latest Pixar film while it’s still in theaters these days. Because if you do miss out on it … Well, there’s always the DVD and/or the new Pixar movie that will be out next year.
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
With the hope that they can turn this lack-of-urgency situation around somehow, Disney & Pixar are now working together to find new ways to get would-be movie-goers excited about upcoming productions. Take — for example — that Buy n Large website that went live last week. Which will (in theory) help familiarize film fans with the enormous & inept faux corporation that helps drive the story in Pixar’s Summer 2008 release, “WALL * E.” FYI: Most of the witty image captures that I’ve used to illustrate today’s article were actually grabbed off of that new website. So if you’ve got a few minutes and are need of some tongue-in-cheek fun, I suggest you go check out the Buy n Large homepage.
Beyond that, there are already plans in the works to help expand the definition of a Pixar film can be. With projects like “A Princess of Mars” and “1906” now in that studio’s development pipeline, films that will liberally mix live action and CG … Well, it’s hoped that these two productions will then help get audiences excited about what else the folks up in Emeryville may have up their sleeve.
But for now, in the wake of “Cars” and “Ratatouille” not exactly wowing Wall Street and/or the movie-going public, the folks at Pixar and Disney are now trying to get a better handle on what film fans actually want & expect from this CG studio. Which explains that survey that just popped up over on the Pixar webpage.
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Though this is obstensively a survey that’s being used to fine-tune the features / mix of elements to be found on the Pixar webpage, there are also some questions here that (to be blunt) reek of a corporation that’s trying to refine its mission statement. Take — for example:
What do you like most about Pixar films?
- Quality of the animation & artistry
- Story
- Characters
- Cutting edge technology
What does Pixar mean most to you?
- Quality
- Authenticity
- Storytelling
- Animation
- Family Entertainment
- Universally appealing films
Copyright Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Given that there are literally hundreds of Pixar fans who regularly come by JHM (If only to kick my butt whenever they feel that I’ve posted something that reflects badly on their favorite animation studio) … Well, if you’d like to let the folks back in Burbank know which aspects of Pixar Animation Studios you feel are the most important, be sure and take this survey ASAP.
Beyond that, what do you think that Disney & Pixar officials should be doing in order to help this CG operation avoid the same pitfalls that tripped up WDAS back in the late 1990s? Change this animation studio’s upcoming productions back into “must-sees” ?
Your thoughts?