‘Lightyear’, or Pixar’s need to find the balance between originality and profitability

Gone are the days when Pixar considered sequels “creative bankruptcy.”. Those words are from Ed Catmull, co-founder of the company, and can be read in his book ‘Creatividad, SA’ published in 2014. Less than 10 years later, the animation studio has already released nine sequels, prequels or spin-offs, including ‘Lightyear’, in which we discover the origins of Buzz, the Space Ranger that Andy acquired a figure from in ‘Toy Story’.

Nine non-original films out of a total of 26 equate to nearly a third of its feature film output. To some it seems enough to throw their hands to the sky and mourn the loss of originality at Pixar, the most revered and respected animation production company of recent decades. (with permission from Studio Ghibli). It also doesn’t help that since 2015 what seemed like an infallible and impeccable journey has begun to have some spots like ‘Cars 2’ and ‘Cars 3’ or ‘Arlo’s journey’, one of the biggest creative and commercial failures in its history, nor that Disney has decided to treat all its films during the pandemic as a “minor” product that did not deserve to go through theaters.

Pixar returns to theaters

‘Lightyear’ is the first Pixar film that the mouse studio opens in theaters since ‘Onward’, a film that critics did not exactly love. Curiously, it is also the first production related to a previous film since ‘Toy Story 4’. It cannot be a coincidence that Disney preferred not to risk the pandemic box office with ‘Soul’, ‘Luca’ and ‘Red’three completely original proposals that might not have attracted enough audiences in theaters that are still too empty.

The distance that separates ‘Lightyear’ from those three films, original stories unrelated to any intellectual property, is a sign of the balance that Pixar has had to find over the last almost 30 years. The friction between the risky and innovative spirit of the company that led it to tell stories like ‘Monsters SA’ or ‘Finding Nemo’, always taking digital technology one or two steps forward with each new film, and the need to be a profitable Hollywood studio that exploits its creations to generate wealth.

From hating sequels to having to make sequels

In 1995, shortly after the release of the company’s first feature film, ‘Toy Story,’ John Lasseter and Steve Jobs had a meeting that would shape the future of Pixar. The computer scientist, owner of the studio after having bought it, pretended to have some control over the productions; Lasseter demanded complete control of the filmmakers over the films. “We don’t want to make cautious movies. We want to continue crossing barriers in narrative and animation”Lasseter said, according to the memoirs of former chief financial officer Lawrence Levy. “We have amazing and original story ideas. Making original things is something very rare. That is what we can do. And that’s what we have to do.”.

Nine years later and with six films released, Pixar was acquired by Disney for about $7.4 billion. Many feared that the production company would lose creative freedom and therefore that disruptive spirit under the mandate of the mouse studio. The premiere of ‘Cars’ a few months later, a film received with worse reviews that, on the other hand, generated 8,000 million dollars in merchandising sales, seemed to confirm the worst omens: Pixar had become just another Hollywood factory, without soul or creativity.

Between the premieres of ‘Finding Nemo’ and its sequel ‘Finding Dory’, 13 years passed. According to the director of both Andrew Stanton, at Disney they were “encouraged” quite vehemently to do that continuation. “Yes there was a polite request at Disney”he told Los Angeles Times. “I was always like: ‘No sequels, no sequels.’ But as vice president I had to agree. Sequels are part of what we need to stay afloat”.

With Pixar there has never been an easy read, and it doesn’t seem like Disney has scuttled their creativity (any more than they have with Marvel).. After ‘Cars’ came ‘Ratatouille’, ‘WALL·E’ and ‘Up’, three of the most acclaimed films in the history of the studio. Original stories that combined quality with commercial success. The next was one of Pixar’s biggest hits, ‘Toy Story 3’, a sequel that perfectly closed a narrative cycle and raised the findings of its two previous installments to another level.

Originality and sequels, are they at odds?

In reality, a sequel, prequel or spin-off is not necessarily a worse or less inventive movie.. The two continuations of ‘Toy Story’ or ‘Finding Dory’ demonstrate this, undoubtedly better films than the original ‘Onward’ and ‘Arlo’s Journey’. And the debate about originality in Pixar films also extends to the proposals that propose new universes and characters: ‘Inside Out (Del verso)’ and ‘Soul’ are films that appear to be novel and unique but remain at the foot of the letter the skeleton of other previous films of the study.

The internet is full of articles dissecting the “Pixar formula,” a set of tools and schematics that shape all of the studio’s films.. Actually, these are not things that are not taught in any script course: the protagonist must have a goal, there must be an obstacle or antagonist that wants to prevent it, he must undertake a journey (often round trip) that taught him several lessons, weaknesses that hinder the way, the first act is crucial to hook the public, you have to rewrite and rewrite until exhaustion…

There may even be something pleasurable about going to a Pixar movie and knowing that several recognizable ingredients will appear. On the one hand, that is what the relationship we have built with the studio over almost 30 years consists of. It’s like going to see a Marvel movie or a Blumhouse movie, brands that have also been established with a mix of tradition and transgression: It seems that we want to surprise ourselves and at the same time recognize the ground we are treading when we see a new movie..

The importance of ‘Lightyear’ being a box office success

‘Lightyear’, although it is not among the best Pixar films, perfectly represents that mix of originality and profitability. Yes, it’s a spin-off, but the concept (it’s the movie Andy saw in 1995, the one that led him to buy the Buzz doll) invites us to expect something very different from ‘Toy Story’. It’s a shame it’s such a clichéd, canonical space adventure.

It is important that this is a commercial success so that Pixar can continue to create original and amazing works in the future.. ‘Lightyear’ comes at a time when the pandemic no longer seems to affect the box office of some of the most commercial blockbusters, so it should be able to approach the numbers of some of Pixar’s highest-grossing films. It’s starring a character that audiences know and love, and it opens at the beginning of the summer, so it pretty much has everything going for it.

Almost. What he doesn’t have going for him is criticism. It currently has a 79% positive review on Rotten Tomatoes (too low by Pixar standards) and an average of 61 out of 100 on Metacritic (tied with ‘Onward,’ for the worst score in studio history). not counting the two sequels to ‘Cars’). “’Lightyear’ is meant to be easy going and good enough entertainment. As such, it does so by being closer to Disney’s second-rate animated films than Pixar’s first line.”he says in his analysis in New York Times A. O. Scott.

The thing is, a Pixar “minor movie” is still a cinematic delight. And that applies to this 26th feature film from the studio. No, it’s not particularly original. Let’s hope that ‘Elemental’, the next film that has been officially announced, will be. And if not, at least we’ve just seen ‘Red’ (sadly, only on Disney+), one of the most unique and original films of recent Pixar. Some of us are very easily disposed to mourn the death of Pixar’s Golden Age, but it’s not so easy to cross out the work they continue to do. Maybe they just spoil us too much.