Why Pixar abandoning “autobiographical and personal” films hurts
Lo and behold, in a recent conversation with Bloomsberg, Pixar shared that they would be turning to the incredibly original formula of sequels, spin offs and reboots to save its falling empire.
It honestly could be funny to see big media conglomerates stumble and scramble, if only it wasn’t such a depressing reflection of the industry’s current approach to storytelling, and at the cost of filmmakers of color.
Bloomberg reports that Pixar’s new strategy is to pursue “a commonality of experience” instead of “any director’s catharsis.” Studio executives will mentor upcoming directors to “focus less on autobiographical films” and, rather, “develop concepts with clear mass appeal.” Pete Docter, Pixar’s chief creative officer, explained, “I don’t think we can ever let ourselves off the hook of making sure that we deliver the best possible and most relatable films.”
It’s worth noting that all the executives interviewed in Bloomberg’s article are White, and it stings to hear them describe Turning Red (2022) and Elemental (2023) as “feeling like [they] messed up.” At one point, Jim Morris, Pixar’s president, dismissed Elemental as just “a good film with a Pixar feel” that “didn’t work.”
But how true is that sentiment?
According to the Bloomberg article itself, a graph showed that Turning Red—which did not have a theatrical release and was dropped straight onto Disney+—had a smaller worldwide box office gross, but has a higher Rotten Tomatoes score than recent sequels and spinoffs like Incredibles 2 (2018), Cars 3 (2017), Finding Dory (2016) and Monsters University (2013).
Furthermore, while Elemental had a lackluster box office opening and performance in America, the film became the most-viewed foreign film in South Korea in 2023, drawing 5.58 million moviegoers within a month of its release and breaking the record for the most-viewed Pixar film released in South Korea.
In this way, Turning Red and Elemental did work, even according to the standards of Ed Catmull, former president of Walt Disney and Pixar Animation Studios. Bloomberg summarizes the three steps to making a great Pixar movie from Catmull’s book Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration:
“Hire great people”—software engineers are specifically exemplified—“because great people will come up with great ideas.”
“Be candid, because candor produces great results.”
“Embrace failure, because failure is a learning opportunity that leads to better ideas.”
These steps do encourage a director to do honest films—autobiographical and personal ones not exempt—so isn’t Turning Red and Elemental embodying the process of what goes into a great Pixar movie? And how is Pixar embracing failure if it’s just going to abandon ship and retreat to the safety of IPs instead of standing by the talents they hired and persevering through disappointing box office numbers?
In the name of making “the most relatable films” with “clear mass appeal,” the deliberate dismissal of Turning Red and Elemental’s successes to only focus on their failures for being “too personal and having no mass appeal” leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
To begin with, Pixar’s new strategy and its justification isn't even as concrete as it is proposed to be. Lightyear (2022) underperformed drastically and is often remembered as a flop, despite being a spinoff to the widely beloved Toy Story franchise. Inside Out (2015) and Inside Out 2 (2024), while coming to bear the hopes of Pixar’s “blockbuster comeback” as a much-anticipated continuation of a successful IP, are also notably personal movies, inspired by both directors’ experiences with their daughters.
This reveals that Pixar would much rather give a second chance to the “mass appeal sequel, spinoff and reboot” strategy than to films by filmmakers of color, and personal films only become “too personal” if they are stories about and from people of color.
At the end of the day, Pixar cares most about appealing to and including its White audience. When White stories are and have been the only standard for what stories should be, it only makes sense that there just isn’t room for anything—or anyone—else.
By using “autobiographical and personal” films from filmmakers of color as scapegoats for their failures, Pixar maintains that White stories are the most profitable and appealing stories, that White stories are the best and only stories that belong on the silver screen.
News flash, Pixar—and you might have heard this one in school when you were a teenager—diversity is not a deal-breaker, but is what makes us stronger! Differences should be embraced, not shelved or thrown onto Disney+.
It’s a shame that we’re missing out on so many great Pixar films.
Besides denying the representation that we will always need, the strategy to only make films that are as appealing as possible—and therefore profitable as possible—stunts and ruins creative expression.
Obviously, Pixar will always be a business first and foremost. It is unrealistic to expect Pixar to always value and prioritize the integrity of creativity and storytelling. This doesn’t make it any less crushing and devastating to know that the studio behind some of our dearest films would silence and dispose of us if our stories “mess up.”
Pixar wants great Pixar movies, but it doesn’t seem like they ever truly wanted great stories and movies from people of color to begin with.