Exactly. I mean, I heard the Incredibles 2 is pretty amazing... I will excuse it if they manage to make an amazing sequel for Ratatoulie, and... maybe... Wall-E. Like, it really doesn't need one. It really doesn't, neither does Ratatouile, but, let's see, aye?
ThePaperMask The incredible 2 is far from amazing. It's definitely not horrendous like the nut job or that bull movie or anything like that but its lackluster and over hyped and no where near comparable to the original. It's a shitty sequel
Inside Out is not about the traditional journey where people travel miles and miles. It’s about an emotional journey that makes it the probably the most mature and deep movie I have ever seen, thus making it my favorite movie.
Funny how you bring up how hard it was to animate over 400 ants on screen when the limit previous set with their budget was only 50, yet give no mention to how much work went into animating the octopus Hank for Finding Dory. If you're gonna give credit for production effort, that took a lot of passion to do.
I know right? Or how hard it was to make Violet Parr's hair, The skin textures and accurate guitar playing in Coco, or in Wall-E: the protag, who's head is only a pair of binocular eyes and only speaks in gradations of "waalleee!" (and similarly for EVE), is more emotive than most other characters. I find that it is also a disservice that NitPix praises the early Pixar films for their success and how quick they put out movies without mentioning the contentious relationship between Dreamworks and Pixar.
the thing you miss is that it was revolutionary at the time, and while the newer animation should also get praised it‘s not the same so maybe think a bit before you judge
Okay, but I have a problem with your analysis of Monsters University. While yes, the Scare Games do ultimately teach Mike and Sulley about teamwork and self-worth and all that, it's a mischaracterization to say it has an entirely generic, overdone message. Mike wants to be scary. But he isn't. At the end of the film, he's forced to accept that. There's no kid's film BS about how "he tried really hard and achieved his dream despite the obstacles in his way." No. Mike is slapped in the face with the cruel reality that he has to settle for something else. And make do with it. I think that's a really interesting, subversive message. Plus, I think it's just a fun movie. I don't watch college movies, ever, so the tropes don't wear me out as much as other people, which probably has something to do with my opinion on it. Is it as good as Monsters Inc? Of course not. But don't write it off entirely.
OddTillTheEnd I think it also has to do with the fact that Monsters University is a prequel to Monsters, Inc. People seem to not care about HOW something is done when it comes to movies. The Infinity War characters that died are obviously coming back so some people feel like they can't care about the ending as much because we know they're coming back. The whole point of the next Avengers movie is how they get brought back, how the survivors deal with those deaths, and what they then have to sacrifice in order to undo what Thanos has done, but people don't seem to care about that. We know from Monsters, Inc. that Mike and Sulley are best friends and that Sulley is the one who goes through the doors to scare children while Mike has all the strategies planned out. When Monsters University positions them as enemies with Mike wanting to scare instead of strategize it forces us to look at the story from a different angle. The question of the movie then becomes "how do we get there from here?" but that is for some reason an uninteresting question to a lot of people.
msnmpn 7 I agree. In regards to Infinity War, the feeling is definitely there that the ending doesn't matter. It would be more of a bold choice to have the villain win if we weren't so completely sure he will be defeated in part two. However, there's something to be said about the shock value of seeing mainstream beloved hero characters get turned into dust while their friends look on in horror. It's a pretty depressing way to end a movie, regardless of how things turn out in the future. I think you're right that "how" is an uninteresting question for MU, especially when it's the only question. You can, however, argue that James Bond films are so predictable that they are also devoid of most questions except "how". Same with Scooby-Doo. So how can they get away with that? I think the answer is that both of those are long series where the core engagement is "how". If you're not on board with "how", then you'll just avoid them. Since the original Monsters Inc. explores so many other questions, a film that only explores "how" seems much more shallow.
Bionicelcor Yes. I think subversion is inherently interesting, at the very least, because by its very nature it has to both be different and provide commentary on what came before. If you don't think that's interesting, then we simply disagree.
OddTillTheEnd Commentary or just a reference? There really is no commentary in previous instantaneous deconstruction. If subversion is done well, with the addition of other narrative devices it has the opportunity to say something, but that’s not the case for it alone and for its most recent executions in media.
"The Day of the Dead doesn't tie into the themes" ah yes, the festivity that is about reconnecting with your family and ancestry and how the living relate to the dead has nothing to do with the movie that talks about family and ancestry and how the living relate to the dead
It's possible to argue Coco has one theme and doesn't take risks, but to say it's themes and setting don't tie together is ridiculous isn't it. That's why it gets you so much emotionally, because it all fits, every bit of the story has come together to earn the ending. You might as well argue the opening scene of Lion King doesn't tie into the themes, which would be equally ridiculous. Also, simple doesn't mean bad. Done well, it often means good.
Yes! I think that while Coco definetely has plot holes, it is an amazing movie none the less. If you look at it from a surface level, Miguel is your average kid that lfollows the heros journey and follows his dreams,etc. However the point of the story is that sometimes family is more important than following your dreams and by that message, it ends up with the family accepting music.
Victory Reviews yeah that house and the boats and the street corners/ alleys are really just places for a character to be and not an environment that was explored!
I think you ripped into Inside Out and Coco our of nostalgia. That fact that Coco follows a simple three act structure isn’t really a criticism. It’s just an observation that it has something in common with most movies, ever. The original Toy Story and the Pixar movies that followed it also played into tropes and cliches. The conflict between Woody and Buzz is a classic new-guy-in-town situation that’s been done many times before. You also don’t give Coco credit for the amount of creative visual style and flair, or for the fantastic music. La Llorona is a great song that is used as a powerful storytelling device. Without words, a huge change in her character is indicated as soon as she starts singing on the stage. It’s things like these, the creative ways that animated films communicate story, that you praise the earlier films for yet ignore for the new ones. I agree that Pixar’s filmography has become rife with sequels everywhere, but the ones that aren’t sequels are still excellent.
I love how he praises Bug’s Life And then barely skims over Up and Wall-E And then shits on Coco Saying it’s only for kids Even though the movies he liked were released when he was a kid
I was agreeing with this video almost 100% until you reached Coco... Coco is a VERY powerful film that wouldn't even begin to be understood by "little little babies". My four year old cousin loved the songs and the colors, but he didn't even begin to grasp why his mother and I were bawling our eyes out when Mama Coco began to sing. My own grandmother had Alzheimer's and had recently passed away when I watched Coco. This film hit extremely close to home and became a more powerful movie than what A Bug's Life will ever be, even given my 20 years old as I watched a "film for little little babies". I think you're being the one driven by nostalgia and the reason why member movies exist, because whenever they innovate and do things RIGHT like Inside Out or especially Coco, someone comes and says "But Toy Story... And Monsters Inc.... And Up..." I love all of those movies but I still allow myself to love some of these new Pixar films as well. I don't think Pixar is dead, I think some people are way too fond of their past and nostalgia and unwilling to accept that a new film might have the same or more meaning than one of the classics. Coco deals with such deep, complex and mature themes that Toy Story, A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc. don't even get close to. If you ask me, death and remembrance of those who are no longer with us is much more mature theme than accepting who you are (as important as the latter might be). And you criticize Coco's villain for being "overly melodramatic"... That was the whole point of it. I now question how skilled you actually are at judging movies that you didn't grow up with.
I fully agree… It's the mentality what yesterday was everything better than today. Inside out is Beautiful. And the world they created is understandable. Sure, you could do everything in an even more complex way, but does that really help the plot? And complaining about characters who are supposed to act as one-dimensional feelings that they are one-dimensional... good job
@@alfa01spotivo yeah but are really people starting to bash recent movies graphics just because technology has evolutioned so it was easier to make them? Of course there has to be respect to pixar because they brought something new but don't frame recent movies as "bad" just because they did't have to work with the same resources.
... Toy Story 3 DOES have a character arc. Woody at the beginning thinks the key to happiness is staying with Andy or else they'll all face either being neglected or destroyed, and through the film he realizes that you should let go of what you're used to because the world changes and you should instead find the next happy moment unless you want to wind up like Lotso who only cared about one single kid.
You're absolutely right. Toy Story needed a film in which the Prospectors ominous words to Woody would come to fulfillment. "Do you really think Andy's going to take you to college...Andy's growing up..."
The skeleton sidekick is Miguel's grandpa who died after Ernesto de la Cruz murdered him because he didn't want to continue with his singing career therefore leaving Ernesto without new songs to sing. This is also pertinent to the story because Héctor (Miguel's true grandfather) wanted to get back home to his daughter Coco but never did because he died. This lead to Héctor's family thinking he just persued his career and never went back home because of greed or pride... And there's so much more about this movie The problem isn't that you didn't like Coco, it is actually that you made it seem bland and lacking of a good story when actually it's an excellent movie.
Liz N.S. Yeah but the fact that the dad constantly wrote letters to coco and then they suddenly stopped would raise suspicion. Also Ernesto got famous with the grandpas songs. And the most popular one was COCO’S SONG. So would that also raise suspicion? “Hey I haven’t heard from my dad in a while, and his music buddy is singing his songs...hmm”
@@beajack4990 Imelda probably never wrote back to him so its stands to reason that they thought Hector might have just realized it was futile and stopped writing or that he just forgot about them eventually.
22:50 there is visualization to show that Miguel’s other family members aren’t as passionately against music as Miguel’s grandmother is; when she smashes his guitar, Miguel’s dad reacts in a subtle way that definitely suggests that was overkill. I actually found there was a lot of nuance in all of the character’s traits that the film manages to display in some way, if you pay attention.
I actually really liked Monsters University. I thought the message it sent was unusual and important, that sometimes you just don't have the skills required to follow your dreams, and you need to do something different. And sometimes things go wrong and you have to pay your dues and work hard to take a different path to success. It's very subversive to the typical "happily ever after" and "you can do anything" message we normally get in kid films. I'm actually really disappointed more people aren't talking about this. As an adult who has had things go wrong and had to take alternative paths to success, that recognition meant a lot to me. Also, as someone who has worked extensively with people with cognitive disabilities, I found Finding Dory more compelling than Finding Nemo, because it showed how having a disability can in fact be a real problem, not just played for laughs, and how important it is to have a support group. I think people are too judgemental of these films.
I didn't knew Monster University pushed a subversive message like that. But I liked it better than "you can do anything if you believe in yourself" bs.
you lost me at finding dory is better than finding Nemo..maybe it means more to you but there is no way its a great sequel.. although i do agree that monsters university is really underrated
@@bloody_outlaw8000 I didn't say it was better, I said I found it more compelling. Same with Frozen 2 recently. I tend to be a little more subjective about my media... Like I can appreciate the technical prowess of a movie or whatever, But the thing that really impacts me is the message. Finding Nemo was undoubtedly an excellent movie and I enjoyed it, and I don't think I have the objectivity to compare it with Finding Dory as far as which makes a "better movie." But the message of Finding Nemo was pretty basic, about parents needing to learn to stop being overprotective, etc. But when have we EVER seen a kids' movie where a character struggles with a mental disability? Because I don't know about you, but Finding Dory was the first I've seen, and they handled it with so much dignity and compassion, it just meant so much to me.
I just made a similair comment like this but you beat me to it! The movie shows that NO you CAN'T always do what you dream of, tough shit but you have to find a way to deal with it. It's oke, go find something else, there is a lot in the world and you are meant for something, just... not what you initially dreamed of! Also, the movie teaches a parallel moral to this: you can have ALL the talent in the world, but without hard work and a lazy cocky attitude that talent is useless.
For me atleast a compelling lesson or theme dosent really matter when almost everything else was mostly boring and stale. A somewhat compelling massage dosent save a movie on it's own Atleast not for me. The movies were just fine if not a bit bland.But I will concede that the massage in monsters uni is something more movies and shows should tackle..
I feel like you demonstrate a misunderstanding of the holiday when you expect Coco to focus on loss. It’s a celebration of the spirits of the dead, not a funeral
Yeah, I mean, its not like its obvious from all the celebrations, and concert, and generally upbeat atmosphere even among the dead. It even ends on a huge celebration with members of their family, alive and dead.
The reason why Coco is such a fantastic movie is exactly because it brings a topic as taboo as death into children's lives and teaches them to see it as something more than purely loss.
“The Day of the Dead doesn’t tie into the themes” Did you even watch Coco? But seriously, I see a lot of conformation bias here. A Bug’s Life is hardly some iconic masterpiece, but you seem to be really exaggerating how good the older films were while desperately gripping on to any perceived flaws in the newer ones.
The only thing he focused on "A Bug's Life" was the ambition in animation technology, he barely doesn't even mention anything else about the film. He only used abl to argue that there used to be ambition behind projects. Why the hell is everyone down here saying he said it was a masterpiece?
@@SaidSakpDemir I think that's the point though. He only talks about the technological aspect to a Bug's Life so he woulldn't have to admit that early Pixar wasn't always perfect. Because that would undermine the argument that older Pixar is glorious and newer Pixar just sucks.
"With Inside Out the world design is so poorly put together, it's near impossible to map out the various locations" There's literally a scene where they look over the world of Riley's head and point out each of the locations as if on a giant map.
That was ridiculous, the "villain" had literally NO REASON to kill is best friend, the real villain was the old bitch that freaked out her family because she's an idiot that never thought on the possibility that her husband was killed
@@Alexander-hi8bo I'm not saying that it doesn't worked for him in that very convenient context, I said that it's forced as fuck, because literally NO ONE (except appearently Pixar directors/writers) would have think "Oh, my best friend wants to go home with his family, I guess I'll kill him instead of just making a deal with him so it's a legit win/win"... See the problem????
im only here to keep it real with you chief but the second part of this video really aint it. if bugs life gets a pass but not coco, then its pretty obvious your nostalgia came into play.
which is kinda ironic considering a lot of the video he was actively trying to talk down nostalgia. id say a bugs life was on the level of cars. not to mention how many freaking toys they made of a bugs life. they have a very similar feel.
I finally got around to watching Coco last night (for some reason when it was first out it just didn’t look all that interesting to me), and i have to respectfully disagree with you about it being just for “little little babies” and not for adults at all. The themes in Coco can very much translate to adults, we have all lost someone, we have all been scared of being forgotten after we die. Those ARE NOT childhood themes, so I think you need to maybe rethink what you consider “little little baby” movies.
I think death and loss are fantastic themes to explore. I would have loved to meet all kinds of interesting characters and dangers in the land of the dead. Each new encounter could teach our protagonist important lessons that all come together in the final act. Leave out the guitar and the shallow villain, focus on the afterworld adventures and loss and you’d have a more focused movie.
The problem isn't that the movie has "childhood" themes - all themes are themes - it's that the way these themes are explored is very poor and derivative. When people say "X" movie is made for kids, they aren't saying the lessons in the movie aren't valuable to everyone, or that . They're saying that "X" movie is so poorly put together that it can only fully be enjoyed by kid, who doesn't have their brain fully formed yet. Does this mean you can't enjoy a "kids movie"? No of course not. There could be many reasons why. People mature at different rates. Very few people ever end up developing good taste for particular media (let alone decent), so cheap, manipulative clichés don't get them so easily. Maybe you recently experienced loss so you were very biased towards really resonating with Coco. That doesn't distract away from that it could be a poorly told story.
25:07 - Coco takes a lot of risk; it explores the concept of ‘death,’ and more imperatively, it presupposes a specific type of after-life in a way that I’m surprised the devoutly religious didn’t have an issue with. It also gave a relatively detailed analysis of Mexican culture, in one of the most racially divided times - when someone is willing to jump on you for getting the slightest thing wrong, or making something that could be deemed as a ‘stereotype.’ When I actually think about it, in terms of the films philosophical concepts that it explores, I consider it the riskiest film that they’ve ever made, especially with the ending. It wasn’t a technological risk mind you, and maybe that was your point, but I don’t see why that’s necessary. Also, the film implies everyone will eventually die into nothingness when they are forgotten. The plot then ends up centering around a character not meeting this fate, and they have to ensure that a dementia-stricken, dying grandma doesn’t forget her own father. That’s pretty heavy, if you ask me.
I mean it was a technological risk too, the amount of rendered lights and level of detail put into the background took complete rebuilding of their software, the lighting in the film compared to what our technology was currently able to pull off at the time was something that took a lot of effort to restructure. The difference is Pixar has the money to invest in tech research now compared to when we couldnt fit more than 50 ants in a shot but still it was intentionally pushing new bounds for what can be done in animation. Taking a Digital Lighting for Animation course we talked about what had to be done to get the effect Coco presented and a large amount of the 7 million plus lights placed in each shot of the Underworld scenes were hand placed, all to stay true to the vision of the Mexican graveyards during the day of the dead
It’s obvious he doesn’t understand the culture of coco! Perhaps the film was too colorful. Also, he doesn’t understand that the one thing the Latino kids are scared of is their grandma or mom with a sandal.
+Gustaff Overshield-Coco is simply not a good movie. Most of the Mexican culture stuff is unapologetically and insufferably pandering, the story is overly cliched, the design is lazy and overly childish, and most of the family are rotten and absolutely despicable assholes. Rather than being patient and trying to tell her grandson why she doesn't want him to be a guitar player again. . .the grandma yanks it away from him and proceeds to smash it right in front of him. What the actual fuck? Once the kid goes into the afterlife, everything is basically one giant misunderstanding where if the family just sat down and talked to the kid, explained who his great-great-grandfather actually was, a lot of these situations could've been avoided. And also, the family is so angry with the great-great-grandfather over a mistake he has repeatedly tried to right, that they are perfectly okay with allowing him to completely fade away from all of existence. 0_0. This movie was insufferable. . .up until the second half when. . .something happened. Right after it was established that the spirits can cease to exist entirely if someone forgets them. . .The movie actually got a lot better. The characters were way less pandering cliches and far more fleshed out individuals. And I don't think that was entirely coincidence-this movie had two directors. One of which was Lee Unkrich, and he was the idiot who tried to copyright the title "Day of the Dead,' a traditional Mexican holiday. (Yup, Disney will slap merchandise and property on everything, even an established holiday. . .) The other was Adrian Molina, and since Lee Ukrinch was reported to have stepped down from Coco in order to work further on Toy Story 4. . .it's pretty clear Molina took over the movie in the second half. . .I have never seen a movie where it's pretty clear just where a different director steps in and takes over. . .and actually makes it better. There is definitely a clear point in the movie where it gets significantly better. . . I'm sure people might be confused and insist, "Well Fera. . .you said the movie eventually gets a lot better. Doesn't that mean it was still a good movie in the end?" Well. . .no. I said it got significantly better in the second half. I never said it got great. The second half is only an indicator of what the movie always should've been throughout the ENTIRE thing. Unfortunately, Molina couldn't completely salvage the massive storytelling problems that largely pervaded the first half and were still not entirely fixed after he took over-The great-great grandmother and the grandmother are still assholes and pure scum. And of course, they have an elaborate chase in the afterlife to retrieve the great-great grandfather's picture, only for it turn out. . .Coco had her father's picture the entire time!?!?!? Wow-not only is that cliched, that is just lazy. . . Make no mistake-this movie was intended to be as safe and as pandering as possible. If Unkrich was completely left to his own devices, that's all it would've ever been. I am pleased that it got better in the second half-that is usually not something I ever see where a movie does get significantly better later on-but that still doesn't make it a good movie at the end of the day. It should've been a good movie, deserved to be a great one, and it very nearly succeeded later on-Unfortunately, when a soulless husk of a corporation wants to weasel and pander to a "minority" and a white director is smug in believing he knows better with Mexican culture. . .than the actual Mexican filmmaker working on the film. . .there's only so much you can do. It tried, it really did, and I'm glad to say there is some heart left in there. . .it's just not enough. . .
Talk about missing the point with Coco... anything can be simplistic and dumb if you strip away it's context. But Coco is a fantastic movie and deserves all the praise it's gotten, at the end of the day it is a wonderful depiction of a Mexican family and the traditions we have in our country... also bonus points, the movie is even better in Spanish, having so many inside jokes for Mexicans that it's not easily translatable to english, shows to you the care they had making this for it's target audience (Mexicans). This movie became the biggest movie in México in 2017, everybody went to see it more then once when it was in theaters, even some people that don't go to the movies a lot went to see this movie, and when a movie like that can impact a country, I can only say that this will be another PIXAR classic.
It may have been a good cultural film, but was it as good as other Pixar films in previous years? Was it as good as Finding Nemo? No. Was it as good as Toy Story? No. It wasn't even on a Monsters Inc. level. Pixar did with Coco what every Disney has been doing for the last 20 years and that is pushing out a plethora of foreign related films. Not to say there is anything wrong with that, but it seems forced. It only makes it relatable to people that are familiar with that culture. Instead of shoving it down your throat and saying this is what we do here in Mexico, I want to see some depth. Engage me. I want to see how does Mexico fit into the Pixar universe, not the other way around. I didn't feel that with Coco. On top of that, the storyline became pretty predictable and cliche after 30 minutes.
NSGrendel subtlety isn’t an art? I came back to this video after a rewatch of Monster’s University and I agree that the worldbuilding is better in the original and that the monster designs here are made more generic (probably bc there’s such a greater number of them? Idk).... but I don’t get the point of how adding monster spikes to everything makes Inc better. Do humans put human ears over everything? Different door sizes? Good worldbuilding. Random spikes??? I really like that building in MU that he showed bc it looks like what a university building might look like in their world. The architecture is very similar to ours, but in a world focused on being scary, it makes sense to incorporate some spikes but in a subtle way. Couldn’t you say the same thing about Mike’s car? Sure I guess. And there’s lots of times MU takes the generic road... the trash food is pretty lame... but I mean is the bad smelling deodorant in the original too different a joke? Idk. My main issue with this video and not just this part of it is how it down plays nuances to make a point. How is an environmental message in Wall•E more of a risk than centering the message around a real world culture of a non white people in Coco? Does he know that the “generic” paper in the opening is part of Mexican culture as well? Idk... it’s like I agree with most of his points but he comes across as so ignorant as he’s making them bc of the way he presents them. And showing a frame of a building with monster designs in an argument about lack of monster designs is just such a perfectly ironic way to demonstrate this lack of nuanced thinking.
Yeah, what everyone else is saying. Spot on analysis until you get to Inside Out and Coco. I've never seen a film so simply and yet completely portray a visual understanding of depression as Inside Out, which I have dealt with most of my life. That movie had me bawling from epiphanies and self-analysis. And Coco had me crying too, and I'm not Mexican. I only mention that to highlight that I definitely don't identify with the themes of family (which many Mexican commenters have pointed out is a fundamental misunderstanding in your analysis). Most of my family kiiiinda sucks and I'm pretty happy that they're not really in my life anymore. But damned if I didn't identify with the themes of finding a way to express yourself in a world that won't let you. I know you kinda just have to take my word for it on this, but I do not cry at movies easily. It takes a lot. Mostly it takes careful and nuanced writing, and thorough and consistent world building. Honestly, Inside Out and Coco kick the shit out of a couple of the first 10. Now a lot of that comes down to opinion. But one thing seems to be consistent among your commenters, and I agree with it, is this; Those two aren't as good as A Bug's Life? Are you fucking high? (on a lighter note, I like most of your videos a great deal, including this one, right up until that bad and nit pickin ass ending......ohhhhhhhh...)
I've never related to a comment more. Inside Out was the best Pixar movie. Yes kid's would sure have fun, but adults would get the emotional part and still enjoy.
I just wanted to say that I'm sorry for your depression and your family situation... I hope you can solve both! 💖 As for the latter, however, Coco also shows how the family is the most important thing, as it's necessary to understand and forgive, because anyone can make mistakes, but a second chance isn't denied to anyone... obviously I don't allow myself to to judge, because I don't know you, I don't know your story, I don't know if you and/or other members of your family have tried to be reunited, but I can tell you that, in the end, what you have left is affection and love of the people you care about most, and maybe now you say you are glad you don't have your family around anymore, but maybe one day, you will change your mind... for this I would advise you to try talking to us, to clarify, pulling everything out with tranquility, maybe even trying to make them understand how important the family is, I would even recommend seeing this movie (never that it could help them, never hurts to try)... obviously mine is just a suggestion (if I can, I try to help anyone the most possible), which you can clearly follow or not, because in any case the choice is yours and I'm nobody to you 😉👍 I add that what you told me struck me a lot, also because I'm very sensitive when it comes to certain topics, like this one, for example, and I can tell you that living with certain weights in, in the long run, instead of making you grow, they destroy you (personal experiences) 💔 Then I repeat: The choice is yours and yours alone, of course 😊💜
Other than you having depression and identifying it in the character, I'm not sure where depression actually is in the movie. I thought the main character was just dealing with her emotions going out of wack and wasn't sure how to deal with it. The whole movie seemed to be about remembering her past and becoming sad that she no longer has that. (I feel like I'm not explaining myself well)
@@cjcathead2468 Honestly, I think this theme is present, but it's not really thorough (the scene that makes me understand this, for me, is when Riley, towards the end of the movie, can't feel emotions anymore)... maybe I'm wrong eh, but it gives me this feeling 🤔
I'm Mexican and I am here to say. Coco sucked, don't praise it just cause it ripped off the book of life. And inside out? It's bland. Besides the literal colors thrown at my face the whole movie feels empty.
With all you criticize Disney for not giving Pixar the production freedom they needed to create some of their later great films, it's probably worth emphasizing that Toy Story as we know it would not exist without two rounds of Disney-mandated rewrites. (And from what I've seen, the first drafts wouldn't be that great.)
It's also probably worth considering that those mandated rewrites wouldn't be needed if Disney didn't hound the Pixar team with their footnotes on what they want to change and how they wanted the movie to be (edgier and darker) in the first place.
You realise those first drafts ALSO only came about because Disney kept saying "make it darker, make it edgy", right? They were fixing their OWN mistake, not Pixar's.
Plus it doesn’t compare to how Remy’s family didn’t approve of his passion - it was because he was a rat who wanted to be a chef, in human society. Miguel’s family forbid him from playing music due to his great great grandfather abandoning his wife and daughter to be a musician.
I think people look at first generation Pixar with rose tinted glasses, mostly because they watched them when they were little little babies. Those movies really weren't as original and as deep as most people seem to remember them. They were decent enough children's animated movies that broke technological ground. They certainly had more charm than what they've been serving up recently but I guarantee a 6-7 y o child today will grow up thinking Coco is a masterpiece and will lament at how Pixar lost its soul when they release Coco 2: Dia of the Mariachi in his mid 20s.
The Cinema Monologues in the first scene of Finding Nemo, a mother and thousands of children die. In the first scene of Finding Dory a “super cute” baby loves it’s parents and then gets lost. There’s a clear drop in quality whether you like it or not.
Top 5 Cartoon I don't equate darkness with quality and light heartedness with fluff. I haven't seen Finding Dory but I imagine it's generic and derivative. I have seen Finding Nemo and find it to be generic and derivative. Had I seen it age 10 maybe I wouldn't be so harsh, but having watched it for the first time when I was in my early 20s, it really didn't hold up as anything special. It's basically a story we've seen a million times, with characters and arcs seen a million times. It's also probably a rip off of a French comic book called Pierrot the Clownfish. I don't begrudge anybody for having a special relationship with it, but I also don't begrudge someone that grew up on Coco or Finding Dory for having a special relationship with those movies. Pixar make very well made, entertaining, mass appeal movies. I don't think the new ones are as bad as people make them out to be (I'd put Inside out as arguably their best film) and I don't think the old ones are as amazing as people make them out to be (I do not understand the love for Monsters Inc. for example).
Claudia Tejero-Rios I grew up with Toy Story but never watched any of the other Pixar films until I was in my 20s. It gave me a strange perspective compared to most people who saw them as kids. As expected I have a real reverence for Toy Story and yet have no love for any of the other Pixar movies of that era. Is Toy Story really heads and shoulders above A Bug's Life or do I just love Toy Story because I watched it a million times on VHS ? I actually find to whole 2007-2010 period to be Pixar's best in terms of Quality, and I would hold Inside Out as one of their finest work even though it's late era Pixar.
You touch on it at the end, but why didn't you wait until you saw The Incredibles 2 to do this video? No judgment, I just find that to be an interesting choice.
No idea, because Incredibles 2, to me, felt like an adult movie written for kids. It's not as good as the first one and the callbacks can ruin it but I consider it less of a sequel and more of a continuation of the story.
If I'm being honest, the second part of the video feels pretty snobby and harsh. A Bug's Life ALSO had a pretty overdone plot, in my opinion it's definitely not one of Pixar's best movies. If that movie gets a pass, how come Coco doesn't?
I agreed with all of your points until you got to Coco. I’m also fed up with the amount of sequels and “member-movies”, but I must give credit where it’s due. Despite its narrative structure being somewhat formulaic I still really like Coco for its characters, music, art direction and emotions. I feel this video would sit better if you used “I” statements rather than “you” statements. Because as it stands, I feel you’re trying to pass your opinion off as objective fact. And while I mostly agreed with your points I don’t think this is a good way to argue them.
dude i like your channel but this video is a major nostalgia trip and i'm shocked you didn't see this at any point during the writing or editing process.
I think that generally, the quality of Pixar's work has decreased but I certainly don't think that's the case for Coco and Inside Out. If you applied the same level of overly critical analysis to Pixar's previous work, you would be able to find just as many flaws that we now overlook. Both of those movies are as competent as any example of Pixar's previous work that you hold in such high regard. I think that nostalgia has made you incredibly bias.
I'd like to see people criticise early Pixar, since popular opinion seems to be "a lineup of sacred cows and Cars, and also A Bug's Life exists, I guess." I find genuine, analytical criticism entertaining, regardless of my opinion of the thing being criticised. The problem with "state of Pixar" video essays is that they all hit the same beats: "Pixar used to make great movies, Cars is a thing that exists, they made more great movies, then Cars 2 came along and ruined everything." I won't argue that Cars 2 isn't a bad movie, even if it is a guilty pleasure of mine and my reasons for disliking the film are slightly different to everyone else's, but once you've seen one video essay, you've seen them all.
I just found Coco to be so boring. The plot was extremely predictable with a story we've seen a dozen times before. I couldn't fathom the family's motivations either. It would have been much more interesting if the family had actually had some real objection to Coco's dream. There could have been real tension between Coco's desires and his family's traditions and values. As it was written the family is just obviously wrong in a way no family ever would be and you're just waiting the whole film for their minds to change. It's manufactured drama that's too artifical to mirror anyone's real experiences.
Basically calling anyone who likes coco or inside out little little babies, even tho you say you understand why people like them, you still dig into them like that several sentences later with complete sincerity
I love those movies, I've always been a child at heart, though adults can enjoy childish things whenever they want. These movies are for all ages whether mature or childish 🤔
I’m gonna be honest, I actually really loved Inside Out. I get that you didn’t enjoy it as much or believe that it didn’t really live up to Pixar’s “glory days,” but I believe it revived Pixar. I brought my little sister to this movie and I have to admit, it hit me hard. I felt like a kid again watching Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Toy Story, and etc. I’d probably even put it in my top 5 Pixar movies, which is saying a lot. Though your points are valid about the story telling and the story arc, I believe this was necessary. They were not only telling the story of Joy and Sadness, but of Riley as well. Fitting in two different stories that work with one another is a very hard thing to accomplish, which Pixar did (ofc they did, they’re Pixar). I genuinely felt a connection with Riley and the characters and left the theater very satisfied, which had not happened in a very long time.
MrTheharryson it’s ok to say you loved Inside Out. Snooty film critiques like NitPix are just really critical buttholes that, well, nitpick things and judge movies based on small, minute details.
@@jikkebouma5512 One could make the argument that that was the point. Joy being the way she is is supposed to show us that Riley is actively suppressing her other emotions, as a result Joy comes off as being a micromanaging, manipulative bitch.
your analysis of CoCo and Inside Out were very weak. You really had to stretch the idea that Ratatouille was better than CoCo. I think you would have been better off acknowledging that inside out and coco were exceptions but instead you lobbied these really odd and super specific criticisms at these movies, which to different extents could be lobbied at all the pixar movies. It's like you did your best to find reasons for calling the movies bad, rather than genuinely believing them to be uninspired or poorly thought out.
CoCo is better in certain regards like the actual visuals and improved animation quality, as well as having a unique soundtrack. However in terms of story beats it repeats the same elements of Ratatouille but with far less engaging characters overall, which is primarily what he was focussing on. From a story perspective Ratatouille does what CoCo was trying to tell but better, it doesn't mean it blows CoCo out the water in every aspect of a movie but for narattive Ratatouille holds up a bit better.
It’s worth noting that at the core of every Pixar movie is an essential question that informs the entire movie. Toy Story- What if Toys had feelings? A Bug’s Life- What if Insects had feelings? Toy Story 2- What if more Toys had more feelings? Finding Nemo- What if Fish had feelings? Monsters Inc.- What if Monsters had feelings? The Incredibles- What if Superheroes had feelings? Cars- What if Cars had feelings? Ratatouille- What if Rodents had feelings? WALL-E- What if Robots had feelings? Up- Why tf am I crying? Toy Story 3- Why do I dread existence? Cars 2-uh Brave- What if The Scottish (not Irish ffs) had feelings? Monsters University- What if students had feelings? Inside Out- What if Feelings had feelings? The Good Dinosaur- What if Dinosaurs had feelings? Finding Dory- What if a Pixar movie received critical acclaim but sucked? Cars 3- What if a Pixar movie was good but critics didn’t dig it? Coco- What if Mexicans had feelings? Incredibles 2- what?
Coco has an incredibly different message than what you think. Miguel, in the end, is willing to give up his dream for his family. He goes through the character arc where he sees family as more important. He does get to play music but that is only because Imelda has a character arc where she accepts that music should be allowed in the family. Not only this, but when you say Miguel has no personality, I completely disagree. He is one of the Pixar characters that I’ll remember and he is absolutely hilarious.
Not really. Miguel learns a lesson that family is important and although he valued it before, after his journey he learns to value it even more. His family don't 'crush all the soul and spirit out of him,' he just learns their reasons for why they hate music (granted it is a pretty stupid reason)and learns to accept that family comes first sometimes.
I mean, Tangled wasn't really about learning to value family. The person who Rapunzel thought was her mother actually kidnapped her as a child. I guess you could argue that Rapunzel learns to value Flynn but I don't see how that relates to learning that family is important. Also it's not 'painted over with Mexican culture.' The day of the dead makes the perfect setting for a film about learning the importance of family because the whole point of the 'ofrenda's' (the family trees) are about remembering family and what they did to get you into the position you are now. Excuse me if I'm wrong but, I'm not sure anything like the 'ofrenda' happens in other cultures.
@@ojeinoway6968 It's one of them, that I most likely will watch again as it has a fairly good story. I have all of the Pixar movies on Blu-ray (or 3d if they were released), and have only watched a few of them more than once. Up, is one of my favourite ones.
I really can't get behind this, like of course cars 2, the good dinosaur, and brave sucked, but a lot of his points just show a blatant misunderstanding of storytelling and movies in general. His only criticisms of inside out that he expands upon are that the headquarters are designed in a boring way and that everything is literal, but anyone who watched that movie can tell you that 1) the design of the headquarters hardly matters, 2) the entire movie is stuffed with metaphor on metaphor of so many themes, story details, and representations of human psychology. He also claims that inside out isn't successful because the world design makes it so the audience doesn't know where the characters are so it makes it hard for them to believe the hardship of the journey they've been on but like, that's not true at all. Once again, anyone who watched the movie and actually paid attention can easily tell you that all the locations can be seen and tracked in a way that's easy to follow, but in all honesty that doesn't really matter, because that's not the point of the movie. It's not a literal journey like taking the ring to Mordor, it's a thematic journey to learn about the importance of sadness and negative emotions. His critique of Coco makes even less sense because it's not a critique, he just lays out the story structure in a very literal way without actually explaining why he thinks these things are bad. The only critiques he expands upon in Coco is that the family hating music because they believed Hector walked out on them to pursue a career in music is unbelievable and stupid, which is a subjective take but at least one that makes sense. But he also talks about how it never feels like Miguel was ever in any trouble or learned any lesson but, the movie isn't about Miguel learning a lesson, it's about the importance of familial support and familial relationships, and this lesson is leaned through Miguel's family. I know this sounds like a butt-hurt nostalgia ridden crybaby whining because someone made a video online calling a movie bad but the reason I'm commenting at all is because he never actually explains the problem with most of these movies, and when he does it makes so sense. I actually wanna try and see where he's coming from to test my own vision of how I see these movies but Everytime I think of what he's saying it makes less and less sense each time. If anyone would care to try and explain his points in a different way or maybe more clearly that would be a big help.
Nah, I'm 100% with you. I actually agree with quite a lot in this video, but his critique on Inside Out and especially Coco don't make any sense. He's basically saying that Coco is bad because it's the same story as Ratatouille but without any subplots and more lollygagging (what?), and he fails to address any issues in the older Pixar films. While they're all still amazing, they aren't all flawless. Espacially Up, in which he acknowledges the amazing opening but conveniently ignores the rest of the film, which actually is just a bunch of lollygagging and wacky hijinks. Even though he brings up valid points, it really comes off as just "hurr, everything was better back in my day".
yeah idk about yall, but coco is so so much better than a bugs life. i cannot tell you half the story of a bugs life because there's too much going on. Coco is so much more than he portrayed it as
@@AVdE10000 Coco isn’t even super similar to ratatouille, other than it deals with the main characters families disapproving of their passions. But Remy’s father disapproved of it because they were RATS in human society, the concept of a rat being a chef does admittedly sound ridiculous after all. Miguel’s family disapproved of music due to Hector leaving Imelda and Coco to be a musician, and Imelda’s hatred was passed down through the following three generations of her family.
@@maxwelihecker481 it's haters are 20 year old toy story worshipping neckbeards who bash on it because "it's for kids" and they blame it because they think it was made to sell toys which is obviously false since is toy story is about freaking toys yet they treat it like god and don't say it's a cash grab
I think it was okay, but definitely not one of the best Pixar's works. Cars 2, yeah, that's bad. I never got myself to see Cars 3, so I can't say anything about it.
@@Yoseqlo1 I would recomend watching cars 3, it is a great sequal to cars (let's just ignore cars 2), without spoling anything cars 3 deveops well on the story from cars while still keeping the original focus.
you gotta remember that we were children too when the original classic pixar movies came out we just grew up im sure the next generation sees their movies the way we did back then
You are assuming everyone commenting grew up with the original Pixar films. Not true. I watched Finding Nemo when I was at university and adored it for it's world building, character development and story telling, not to mention it's beautiful moving soundtrack. So watching Finding Dory also as an adult, I can claim I am watching it without a child's nostalgic bias. However, no matter how much I wanted to like Finding Dory, it can't hold a candle to the finesse and care to attention as the original created. So I believe the point holds regardless of the age the person was when they originally watched it.
I mostly agree about the sequel shenanigans. Bunch of the rest comes across as nostalgia bias tho. Also, it's near impossible for Pixar now to "stretch the limits of 3D Animation" since this technology has been massively improved in those years. And if you wanna talk about storytelling.. well, Inside Out on itself is such an simple idea that I had no idea they could stretch it out for a full-length movie... but they nailed it and it makes for a very creative & cult movie imo!
@@flowersoul6894 It is really good, but I love Monster's Inc. so much. It's always been my favorite. But once I saw Coco, it immediately knocked Up to 3rd for me and it shot right to 2nd place haha.
@@tgguitarguy Don't worry, I understand and it's great! Everyone has his own movie of the heart, after all (think that Coco has become my favourite movie *EVER,* for example, and never happened to me before, despite my crazy love for Animation and Cinema ), and by the way, I love Monsters Inc. so much! I love all the Pixar movies and pretty much all the animated movies I've ever seen! So I really have no problem with this movie, absolutely! 💖 In truth, many Pixar movies are pretty much on par! If I can make a ranking, it's only for infinitesimal details (in the Pixar ranking with parity, both A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc. are in 4th place, Coco in 1st) ... here is my ranking with parity (I have particular tastes, I know): 1) Coco 2) Up, Cars 1/3, Brave 3) Inside Out, Finding Dory/Nemo, Wall-E, The Good Dinosaur, Toy Story 3 4) Monsters Inc., Monsters University, Toy Story 1/2, Ratatouille, Cars 2, A Bug's Life, The Incredibles 1/2 I look forward to seeing Toy Story 4 and, next year, Onward 💜 Instead what is your ranking of Pixar movies (with parity or not)? I'm curious 😊
@@flowersoul6894 Oh boy this was hard to rank but here you go. 1.) Monster's Inc. 2.) Coco 3.) Up 4.) The Incredibles 5.) Wall-E 6.) Toy Story 2 7.) Finding Nemo 8.) Toy Story 9.) Incredibles 2 10.) Ratatouille 11.) Monster's University 12.) Toy Story 3 13.) Inside Out 14.) Cars 15.) Finding Dory 16.) The Good Dinosaur 17.) Cars 3 18.) A Bug's Life 19.) Cars 2 20.) Brave
@@tgguitarguy I understand you, you know? I'm not good at making rankings either, even though I love so much doing them! (in fact sometimes them change ahahahahah) 😂🤣 I see that in some places we coincide! I'm sorry to see Brave in last place! I know it's not their best movie, but I really love it! While I love watching movies like Coco and Up so high 💜 Here is my current ranking of Pixar movies without parity: 1) Coco 2) Up 3) Cars 4) Brave 5) Cars 3 6) Inside Out 7) Finding Dory 8) Wall-E 9) Finding Nemo 10) The Good Dinosaur 11) Toy Story 3 12) Monsters, Inc. 13) Monsters University 14) Toy Story 15) Toy Story 2 16) Ratatouille 17) Cars 2 18) A Bug's Life 19) Incredibles 2 20) The Incredibles I'm sure that both Toy Story 4 and Onward will be in the upper part of my list, I can feel it! They attract me a lot for many reasons, and I hope they will fully satisfy me 💖
I feel you didn't really give the fairest of all criticisms to Coco. The characters certainly touch more themes than you seem to imply. You're ignoring the relationship between Hector and De la Cruz, for some reason, for example. As a whole, there's themes of the meaning of family, obligations, relationships beyond mutualism, sacrifice, human finitude, liberty, class division and general unfairness (notably; famous people get to live longer...), etc...
Thank you! Your high praises towards Coco absolutely outshine NitPix's bullying criticisms towards that film and other recent Pixar films like Cars 3, Finding Dory, Inside Out and to the least extent, Monsters' University and The Good Dinosaur.
I just think this guy can’t probably analysis films that are well nuanced if he forgets about themes themselves. He seems to be focused on the golden years. It was an okay video
I've always hated Monsters Inc. Not because it's a bad movie, it's a fucking fantastic movie! But fucking Mike Wazowski. This guy led me to the revelation that I basically can't see green. When leaving the movie my family was talking about it, and everybody kept saying the green guy, the short round green guy. I had no idea what the fuck they were all talking about. When I finally realized what character, I was in disbelief that they all thought he was fucking green. He is not even the lightest bit green, or at least what I recognize to be green. So ya, did a test afterwards and found that I can barely see any green. I have a very small amount of green detection, but apparently not much.
grim the reaper, did you even read my post? Why would I see him in black and white if I only have trouble seeing green? That condition would be called Achromatopsia, and it is extremely rare. It really isn't even known if they see truly in black and white. The way the eye works, it would make more sense if they can see only different shades of either red, green, or blue. To see in genuine black and white would likely be caused by a neurological issue rather than a physical problem with the eye. My condition is deuteranomaly, an inability (or reduced sensitivity) to see green light. I can still detect green a little bit. So only very strong greens I can see as a distinct color. It is fairly hard to describe this accurately. I see color the way I've always seen it. The only reason I know that I can't see green very well is because that's what the eye doctor told me. But anyways, to answer your question, I recognize Mike as yellow. I've been told he is actually a yellow-green color. I do not see even the slightest hint of green in him, not at all.
Random Ashe idk this whole video seemed really nit picky, and I guess I shouldn’t be surprised but I thought the name was ironic or sarcastic or something. I get the feel that he fixates on all the negatives in these movies, which are legitimate and well argued, but it makes his argument come across as a snap judgement he made early on and then proceeded to cherry-pick evidence to support his opinion.
Well ultimately thats how all reviews work. There is no such thing as an objective review and if a critic ever suggests that they are being objective, they're lying. We like or dislike things for various reasons, with better critics being able to rationalize it better. They all felt like legitimate points that I agreed with so I don't think they can really be called cherry-picked.
I love how you bashed Coco yet didn't even touch upon how boring and lackluster A Bug's Life was plot-wise. It performed well, and at the time it was technologically mindblowing, as you said, but I bet that if you asked anyone who saw it the names of 4 characters from that film they wouldn't be able to tell you. You really shouldn't be giving free passes to the older movies just because they're from an era of generally good films. A common flaw with cartoon reviewers these days is that they don't take off their nostalgia lenses before reviewing, and you're falling into that exact trap. As someone who's been watching cartoon reviewers for the past eight years, I really hope you consider this feedback, because I do think you have potential to stand out from all the other manchildren on this site.
I was thinking the same thing. Coco is BY MILES better then a Bug's life yet A Bugs life got a free pass. Coco is an amazing movie. But like someone said before me. Any movie's plot will seem dumb or uninteresting if you strip away the context. Miguel's journey is much more important that that of Remi for instance. What does Remi have to loose? The restaurant shuts down, Remi and Linguini move on. Miguel doesn't succeed... The whole family keeps on hating on Hector, he disappears in the afterlife and Miguel is dead. I'd say his journey is far more epic than Remi's. Also the scenery in COCO is amazing I don't care what you say.
@ Katie G, "but I bet that if you asked anyone who saw it the names of 4 characters from that film they wouldn't be able to tell you." Four characters are Hopper, Dot, Flick, and Thumper (and I was able to tell you that *without* doing any research and having last seen the movie years ago). A Bugs Life may not be the most memorable, but I'd still put it leagues above The Good Dinosaur. A Bug's Life at least has an interesting and menacing villain. Hopper is a bully, but he's not one-dimensional. He loves power and being in control, but he realizes how powerful his enemies truly are, and exercises caution in wanting to keep the ants in line (realizing that an ant had stood up to him *months* ago, wanting to kill the queen to further put the ants in their place, etc). Also, there are plenty of other good cartoon reviewers on this site: hotdiggedydemon, alphajayshow, Rebel Taxi, PieGuyrRulz, Shadow Streak, Animat (who even with some of his flaws he's been learning), etc, all take off their nostalgia goggles and review things fairly. There are plenty of cartoon reviews on this site that aren't "manchildren".
@@winnetouch foh a bug's life is a classic. I literally watched this movie 300 times probably more when I was a kid. And if it was playing on TV rn I'd definitely keep it playing as background noise and pay attention at the interesting parts, like when they build the fake bird, or when hopper intimidates and LITERALLY KILLS one of his own gang members by dumping a buttload of nuts on him. Or that crazy finally. I mean just cause you don't like doesn't mean you're right. I will defend a bug's life till the day I fucking die buddy. And yeah I may not be able to name 4 characters of the top of my head, but I can fuck your bitch. Haha remember that vine... good times... good times
First of all... older movies don't necessarily get free passes... but new mediums really do. There's a lot to dislike about the Wizard of Oz, for instance. A Bug's Life, however, wasn't a boring movie in any way. Sure it's skeleton... the outcast that returns to save the villiage... has a crush on a girl out of his league and gets the girl... makes interesting new fellow outcast friends who help him on his journey, blah blah blah... yeah. It's been done. However, most pop songs use the same 4 chords. It's not really any different. The outcast to hero arc is a VERY popular arc for protagonists. Get over it. The voice acting was tremendous. The world development was an absolute game changer (the technology didn't exist up to then to have real tactile looking objects that are so clear in quality that you can show their function without telling. For instance, the part where water droplets were served at the bar... they didn't have to tell you what it was. They showed you what looked to be a bartender serve it, and it showed the texture and jiggly physics of it, and it showed the insects injesting it. Only somewhat possible in cartoon form. THAT is what the CGI medium was most fascinated with in the old days. Scaling down. Scaling up. Creating world specific technology and appliances, etc... CGI was a way to immerse people into a new world physics without limits, and Bug's life was GREAT at that... as opposed to the heap of garbage nobody seems to remember called "Antz" which was bland, uncanny, and quite frankly a day late and more than a dollar short in terms of execution. So yeah... A Bug's Life... maybe you didn't personally like it... I personally didn't like Space-Balls... but that's simple unappreciation of the merits of the movie. In my case, I'm not a big sci-fi fan... don't like Star Wars... or Trek... so a parody of this genre just doesn't appeal to me, but I can see where it's a good movie. Well, if you don't like traditional hero arc based stories that focus on designing worlds over story... too bad for you. Don't watch Bug's life. But generic story lines are ideal for family movies (because children watch them) Using a generic storyline is only really sinful if you aren't considering the audience, or if the movie purports to be cerebral in nature. Bug's life isn't a cerebral story. It's an immersive adventure story. Get over it.
Yeah but it's a classic in your mind because you watched it 300 times. Some other kid is going to have the same argument about coco in about 20 years. Just because you watched it as a kid doesn't really make it a masterpiece.
I can’t believe it’s taken me this long to watch this. I like some of your other videos and this one kept popping up in my recommendations. Anyway, most of what I have to say has kinda already been said in some of the other comments but I’ll add my bit anyway. I didn’t have too many issues with the first half of the video or a lot of your points on sequels that have come out. It’s when we get to your reviews of Inside Out and ESPECIALLY Coco that things kind of start to fall apart. While I liked Inside Out, I could at least understand some of the critiques you made about it. But when you started talking about Coco, I started to wonder if we even watched the same movie. You basically simplified a lot of what actually happens in the movie to make it sound more uninspired than it actually is (ex: just simplifying Ernesto as an “overly melodramatic villain” when there’s far more to him than that.) And I find it odd that you criticize a lot of the 2010 era Pixar films as being uncreative in terms of visuals and then just lump Coco in there despite it having arguably some of the best visuals that I’d say are more than on par with previous Pixar films in terms of visual creativity. Also, you can take any Pixar film (any film in general really) and break it’s story down to its bare bones to find stories that have already been told before. “A Bugs Life” is literally based off “Seven Samurai”. A movie isn’t bad or “only meant for babies” because it uses a familiar story. Thats only a problem if it doesn’t bring anything new or interesting to the table. While I’d rather not assume your motivations, it seems you only talked about Inside Out and Coco this way so they’d better fit within your argument that “all Pixar movies after 2010 are trash” Look, I agree. As a whole, Pixar’s recent bunch of movies haven’t been as strong as what came before. But studios like Pixar have their eras of ups and downs. Disney had the Disney Renaissance and then followed it up with a bunch of less successful movies in the next decade. I think because most of us (at least within my age group) are old enough to remember seeing Pixar’s older films in theaters when they first came out, it’s easier for us to spot when there’s a downgrade in quality. Not trying to say studios shouldn’t always try to push the boundaries of quality or anything like that. I’m just saying that some of your arguments may be based more on your gut emotional reactions rather than the actual quality of the movies you talk about. You even state yourself that a lot of the movies you talked about aren’t bad objectively
I wouldn’t say they’re dying, but they’re definitely going through some growing pains. Especially with the higher ups shifting around in the fallout of the Lasseter scandal. Inside Out and Coco show they definitely still have that spark. Maybe this is what they needed to shake things up?
zachanikwano There were a lot of sexual harassment allegations and he will be leaving at the end of the year. Pete Docter will be taking over as the chief creative officer when Lasseter leaves. Check Google News and you’ll find several articles about the allegations cause damn there are a lot of them.
Wyatt The Nerd Sweet merciful crap! If these scandals keep going we'll have no one left in the entertainment industry. (Not that I'm dismissing the allegations of course.) But it's become almost like a game to guess who's going to fall next.
@@someonerandom8552 There are allegations, but seriously, they are ridiculous from what I have heard. Lasseter is a hugger. And you can dislike huggers, but throwing him out of the company he created for it...Pixar deserves to go bankrupt. I wouldn't be surprised if some jealous people did sling those accusations around out of jealousy. Lasseter for one took some of his people with him and is still doing movies and will release one soonish from what I have heard. There is even a trailer out.
Where you lost me. "And now the Incredibles 2 is out in the UK. I haven't seen it yet, but I already know that it is going to be a passive uninteresting experience which achieves nothing new." This is where I take umbrage with you as a critic. When you sit down to watch Incredibles 2, I am assuming you will, you are walking in predisposed to a certain point of view. You should walk in a bit more open than that. If I walk into a movie expecting it to be passive and uninteresting then I probably won't enjoy it very much regardless of how good it may be.
I'm more interested in why he didn't make this video _after_ watching I2. And yeah, I guess his opinion would become confirmed anyway but that way he could at least provide some insightful commentary. And this video would remain 100% up to date all the way until the release of TS4 next year. A weirdly missed opportunity.
I would disagree with that sentiment, I don’t think anyone goes unbiased into a film unless you literally know nothing about the film, the creative team or the studio behind it before viewing it. We immediately form expectations when we see anything from a piece of media, even just knowing the title of a movie or tv show gets us speculating on what to expect. It is the job of filmmakers to either meet these expectations or subvert them and the best filmmakers/studios are able to control what the general expectations of a person are before entering the theater through information given through advertisements.
He was right though, word for word. I had no such predisposition, and the the film was bland in comparison to the first. "Remember when the supers all did all those things? In the first one?" He used his knowledge of how sequels work in the industry to predict the tone of the film. You know what helps people walk into movies more open and not pre-judging? NOT SPITING OUT SEQUELS year after year and setting a trend for low quality that you fear walking into the theater.
@@GuitarLover297 Your entire reasoning is flawed. You try to make the Incredibles 2 out to be a 'member? Movie, but the way you point it out is literally ragging on it because it still has superheroes. Its like me saying that Toy Story two was bland and uninteresting because "remember when the toys did that thing where they are alive? Remember?" Toy Story 2 might be bad, but not for that reason.
It’s a good movie but the secondary story with Dash and Violet fighting is the exact same as the first movie and is even acknowledged in the movie itself besides that Incredibles 2 is just as good as the first one.
Have to disagree with you on Coco, the world inside the movie is deeply inspired by Mexico (I am mexican) and our culture, its not just THERE because it can. Long explanation on mexican culture ahead: The place where Miguel and their family live is inspired by the town Mitla, Oaxaca, where zapotecans believed it was the land of the dead, there even is a temple in honor of the god of death in there. Ernesto lives in a palace, similar to Palacio de Bellas artes in Mexico city, rich in color and full of detailed symbols. The world of the dead is inspired by Guanajuato and its endless, spiraling streets. A city rich in color and artistry. Connected to the living world by a path of flowers petals (Xempasuchil) which are used in the day of the dead to guide spirits back home. The world of the dead exists since centuries ago, the mayans believe that cenotes (the place where Miguel is thrown into) is the path to the death realm. Where does Miguel and Hector get thrown into? a Cenote, and their family alebrije saves them! That alebrije has the main shape of a Jaguar. Jaguars were believed to be the only ones able to pass to the living and death world freely, thanks to the mayan god Balam, which is a JAGUAR. But I guess this all is just "another pretty place to run in." Mexico is infinitely rich in culture and it always angers me that people just see my country at face value and believe the only cute place to go to is Cancun. I will always be grateful towards Lee Unkrich and the team dedicated into the movie for portraying my country so beautifully.
25:11 This line right here comes dangerously close to undermining everything you said previously. You can''t just go into each new Pixar movie and look for ways that it fits your narrative or it just looks like confirmation bias
Mmmm...Idk, some of these points seemed like double standards. For example, you complain about Inside Out not having a rich enough world, but then you complain about Coco not being as good as Ratatouille despite it having much more distinct visual storytelling. It also takes a much different look at the concept since the family does actually have an understandable reason for their resentment toward the main character's passion, while Remy's family is boring and forgettable. The villain in Ratatouille is also trash, while the villain in Coco is genuinely surprising and threatening. You can make any film sound better or worse if you focus on very specific elements, but to someone who's seen all these movies, you sound biased. It seems like you like older Pixar because that's what you grew up with and you just don't like Coco and Inside Out as much because they're newer. You really think Toy Story is a far more mature story than either of those? It's a fantastic movie, don't get me wrong, but calling Coco and Inside Out "baby movies" in comparison to Toy Story of all things. Also, you didn't have any criticism for A Bug's Life? Really? What deep nuances did you see in that film that made it a classic that's far more memorable than anything from new Pixar? I mean, it's fine if you like it, but that film is very forgettable. Let's be honest, people don't talk about that movie like they do Toy Story or Finding Nemo. There's a reason it's one of the movies that hasn't gotten a sequel. It also seems weird how Disney's meddling was a good thing when it gave us the Toy Story everyone knows and loves, but it's a bad thing once sequels are involved. You're entitled to your opinion, but this script sounds a lot like some old man complaining that "things were better back in my day!" It's like your nostalgia makes you more forgiving of films you grew up with, so you don't criticize A Bug's Life, but now that you're an adult, you can criticize Coco and Inside Out all you want and claim Pixar is dead. I know I'm just repeating myself, but I wanna make sure that I'm being clear. I'm not accusing you of being a nostalgia junkie. I'm just saying that's what this script sounds like. I'd recommend making sure your points are more balanced in the future so you can better argue your case. When your judgment is skewed in favor of one side, those who notice are more likely to dismiss your entire argument.
sodaandcookies1 I don’t think that’s the reason. Why is everything about race? He didn’t like the movie, some people in this world didn’t. I personally really like Coco, it’s beautiful and made me cry multiple times. It has nothing to do with race. I wish people these days didn’t assume that everyone is a mindless bigot.
sodaandcookies1 In some cases we can’t, but in this case it’s obviously not racism. Reading through the comments section some other people seem to think it’s racist as well. If the first thing that comes to your mind is racism when someone doesn’t like an ethnic movie, then that’s on you. Its more telling about you than the person you’re putting that label on. Again, everything in this world is not racist.
To the point about Coco, I don’t think you actually took time to really dissect it. I don’t consider myself a critic, but pretty much instantly I understood the multiple messages the film was trying to get across. First off, the kid wants to be a musician, when his family are staunchly against him doing that, due to his dead grandfather betraying them a long long time ago. If you don’t understand why this is interesting, you probably haven’t been in a Mexican household, because this grudge holding mentality is very real in those types of households. Especially if it relates to their family being betrayed. Plus, there are moments where he is clearly being selfish, or pursuing this just to spite his family, and that’s very different for a character to act selfish in a Pixar film. Also, there’s the M Night Shayamalan twist at the end, which I won’t reveal for the 3 motherfuckers who haven’t seen it. On top of that, there’s also a moment where he’s willing to put his family first and give up music to keep his grandfather alive. If that is not tearjerking storytelling, I don’t know what is. The movie’s great, dog. I’m not normally a guy to say this, but stop hating. They hit a slump for a second, but they’re far from dead.
Gala Actually, it does equal good storytelling. As a person who writes stories, creating a story that gets somebody to cry at the end, means that you already have to have an emotionally gripping story. Also, before you do your contrarian thing - YES - an emotionally gripping story is a good story. It’s not easy to hold people’s attention to a story, let alone create a story that people emotionally relate to. With all this being said, if you’re still gonna be a contrarian, try to write a story yourself & show it to people. Better yet, try to write an emotionally gripping story & show it to people. I think you’ll be fed a heavy dose of reality.
BowditchXD I mean, if a story makes people cry it doesn't make it automatically good. Twilight made people cry, and It isn't a good movie. Look, I've cried with some movies because I was emotionally invested, but that doesn't make them any better.
BowditchXD And if you only write stories to make people cry, let me tell you that you're not a very good writer. You could write a story about a kid with cancer, and even if it is the worst story ever, people will cry, you know why? Because it's a kid with cancer, just like a woman with demencia remembering his dad, it's manipulative and cheap.
I think you missed the point of Finding Dory. It isn't about finding her parents, it's about finding her self. The inciting incident isn't what happened in the flashback but the fact that she had q flashback.
Well, to be fair he doesn't say The Incredibles 2 looks mediocre, rather that he *knows that it is going to be a passive uninteresting experience which achieves nothing new* Wait was I trying to defend him? Huh. I guess not.
I feel like Coco and Inside Out are just as creative as the original films, especially Coco. You just don’t see them through the same rose colored glasses as you did the ones from your childhood
Haven’t seen Coco yet but I gotta say I saw inside out in the cinema and while it got me emotional at the time, looking back at it - I never had the urge to see it again. And I think that makes a big difference. Kudos to everyone who can enjoy Inside out. I just never got invested in the characters.
I agreed with just about 90% of this video, and even as someone that loves Inside Out, I understand the Inside Out criticism but man, you dug way too hard into Coco, and for the first time in one of your videos you were completely hypocritical Nearly all of the issues you pointed out in Coco are present throughout the rest of Pixar’s library (such as Coco retreading a familiar story structure) and the rest were just nitpicking to such an unholy degree it came back around to being genuinely impressive And, as many have pointed out, you failed to bring up the great things that both Inside Out and Coco did, passing over them to further drive in the completely backwards and click-bait-y idea that “pIXaR Is DyINg” I love the first 10 or so Pixar films, but at least I’m able to take off my nostalgia glasses and see that they had flaws just like these new ones do I’ll take a dozen Coco’s and Inside Out’s over another sequel...or the Good Dinosaur You’ve officially lived up to your name, old friend
I dunno... A Bug's Life was far from what I would call original. It's a standard Liar Reveal Story. Sure they may have pushed the limitations of how many models can be rendered on one screen, but that doesn't make a good story. It was a story for kids. More simple and basic than Inside Out or Coco. Hell A Bug's Life wasn't even original. They were seriously trying to release a film about ants quicker then the developers of Antz.
Agree with you on everything until your last two sentences -- Antz was the rip off of Pixar, not the other way around. Yes, I'm aware Antz came out first, but that's because people "defected" from Pixar in the production of A Bug's Life and told Dreamworks what sort of movie they should quickly churn out to steal Pixar's thunder, and it totally, totally worked.
I remember a scene in that movie where they argue underneath a truck where a huge chunk of that truck is just a poorly textured unrendered flat rectangle. So no, we've definitely come a loooong way
A lot of people have already said it, but I think you ripped into Coco and Inside Out on nostalgia and you didn't give them props for the things that they did extremely well. You also don't understand the kind of grudges Mexican families can hold friend, especially when a family member was the one that wronged them. Coco was very emotionally resonant and also a very well made film, and in my opinion easily stands with Incredibles, Up and Wall-E. If you look back at older Pixar films... A lot of those are also mainly just good, and nothing truly spectacular, with the select few from that era being; Incredibles, Up, Wall-E and Ratatouille. Don't get me wrong, this was a great video and you spoke your opinion clearly and concisely, however I still think you're looking at early Pixar with rose tinted glasses.
EFX616 grudges of Mexican families? No Mexican family acts like how they do in coco, why is it just Mexican families, how come it isn't other families. I live in a Mexican family and they don't hold grudges like that at all.
I know a Mexican family that dont hold grudges; but that doesnt mean that other's dont. I have read stuff online about it, just a quick Google search should help you.
I know Americans, who are not school shooters; but that doesn't mean that other's don't. I have read stuff online about it, just a quick Google search should help you. (To Kyle)
I think this dude is having a "My generation had better movies than you." complex lol. I've grown up on Pixar, by far Toy Story was my favorite as a child but to say A Bug's Life is better than Coco? I don't think I've ever met someone who said A Bug's Life is their favorite movie lol. Also to write off Coco as "bland story telling/predicable" is lazy in itself. There was so much culture and complex story telling within Coco with Family vs Fame and to write it off as "selfish brown boy wants to play music" is appalling.
If it wasn’t for the scene by the lake, Monsters University would have no value to me. The Good Dinosaur and Finding Dory feel so bland to me that I haven’t seen them more than once.
Yeah the problem was in the main characters. Flick or Flit (idk the main ant) was just so boring. Same with princess Atta. Being a ‘nerd’ and a ‘nag’ we’re the only traits they had. Plus Hopper was generic. The circus friends were much better. If they’d followed the original story wheee the grasshopper is lazy and the ants work hard maybe it would’ve been more nuanced. On that note I’m pretty sure most Pixar films would work out better if they were shorts. Think of all the bad/ok Pixar films and imagine them as no-dialogue, music filled shorts.
I believe you're experiencing the nostalgia effect. The "my childhood was the best" effect. Coco and Inside Out hold up just as well as those older films. All of these movies are aimed at kids and they all have plot holes Why don't the human adults in monsters inc remember the monsters? Why do the toys feel the need to hide their sentience? How have the humans never found out? Why did the toys scare Sid instead of trying to change him for the better? Why did the dentist keep giving his niece fish if he knew she was going to kill them? There's always SOME holes. But it's an animated movie you're not supposed to think about those things
Actually Johns absence and Pixar’s push to make more sequels drastically affected the quality of their films, so Coco and Inside Out had less effort put into them and were trying way to hard to pander to children
i really get a feeling that most people who don‘t get why we don‘t like the new movies as much haven‘t watched the old pixar/disney stuff. it‘s not just nostalgia
@@FrankHunes I grew up in that generation I've seen them all. It's like when people try to argue the old Space Jam was a lot better than the new one. Space Jam was a terrible movie but we were kids when we saw it
I remember when Up came out and it was considered the worst Pixar movie where "only the first 10 minites are good. The bird and the dog are annoying. Plot holes about how the villain should be dead. Pixar is dead". Or how Wall-E was boring with a shitty second half. This video will look exactly like those comments in the next 10 years. Honestly, defending something mediocre like A Bug's Life and going against movies like Inside Out and Coco is not good. Every new Pixar movie will become "The worst Pixar movie", but in 10 years time it will suddenly become their best
Kiuraz A Bugs Life was a cute movie, cool concept, with a detailed world and memorable characters. I could name each character in the movie, and I've only seen it about 4 times (first time in 1998 when I was 5). He made a good point about the lack of new memorable characters in stuff like Inside Out and Monsters University. I can't even remember the new characters in the Incredibles 2, and I just saw that movie, and kinda liked it. I only remember the ones they created years ago in the first one.
I agree that Up and Wall-E are overrated but I think the point of the video is that those early Pixar movies took risks and tried new things in a way the newer ones don't. That's still true of those two movies, even if I didn't love them they were not retreads of tired ideas or something a million other movies already did.
So the copy pasting of ants is impressive compared to Coco a love letter to the day of the dead and Mexican culture. Inside Out makes sense when you understand that every character has the mental age of a child who has very simple emotions. Also it showed the importance of sadness. Joy wouldn't let Riely be sad which almost caused bad mental damage.
Ok, you’re letting nostalgia corrupt your opinion. They still stand by their old mottos of making a new break in the CG animation world. In Coco it was the fact that every chord struck in the movie is accurate to the guitar. The new movies have good, if not great stories. But, they’re “missing something”. They’re missing you either being 5-12 years old, or have a ridiculous amount of nostalgia for old movies.
whilst lighting, sound, and textures have significantly improved in the newer Pixar films, the writing has definitely gone down in quality significantly.
"They’re missing you either being 5-12 years old" LMAO what kind of shitty argument is that? Pixar used to make great movies suitable for kids and adults.. now they dont. Simple as that. Suck up the criticism and open your eyes. Your fanboyism is getting to your head.
No. While I agree that Coco and Inside Out are just as good as Bugs Life, Cars, Ratatouie, Incredibles, Toy Story 1 and 2 and Monsters Inc they are missing the thing that makes Finding Nemo, Up and Walle absolute masterpeices. Some of the others are deffinetly masterpeices but not like these 3. I can't really put my finger on what it is but those 3 movies go beyond Pixar making great films that are just as important to adults as they are to children.. they are almost kubrickian in nature.
"In Coco it was the fact that every chord struck in the movie is accurate to the guitar" Is that something special? Why? It isn't, that's just an excuse, the story telling was nothing special.
@God of Light, the writing has definitely *not* gone down significantly. You can't tell me that a Bug's Life or Monster's Inc is better written than Coco.
I'm sorry, I find your dress-down of Coco ridiculous. It explores the themes of memory and connection to family so well it made me cry even after three viewings. It has the strongest pathos of any Pixar film to date for both me and many people I know. You missed the point entirely in pursuit of a clickbait video title.
He's right when he's saying that the story is bland and that the characters are written with 1 trait. Miguel is a child, he likes music, and that's literally EVERYTHING. Yeah i guess everything is subjective but there are lots of downsides in recent pixar that you can't ignore if you want to have an analytic approach.
his love for music in that shitty environment causes more conflict in someone that could fill a life time let alone one movie. just because you cant feel an ounce of empathy doesnt make it a shit movie lol.
I thought the plot was rather predictable and I agree the characters weren't as well defined as in some other movies, however I think the topics that were explored were unusual and interesting and the emotional aspect should have been mentioned. The part where he sang with his great grandma brought out tears.. And by tears I mean bawling... so it did at least something well.
I actually loved cars, I see your point about how did they get pictures up and I suppose they could have focused on a more car focused world, but to me it was still a really good film.
Yeah, I don't get the hate for Cars. I thought Cars and Cars 3 were excellent movies. Even Cars 2 can be enjoyable, if you think of it as a spin-off rather than an actual entry and think of Cars 3 as being the proper Cars 2.
@@VGamingJunkieVT THIS! I loved cars and I actually quite enjoyed Cars 2. Cars 3 was a great homage to the fans of the first film. I really don't get the hate for these films.
Cars two is kinda weird though, if you didn’t watch the first then watched the second you would be extremely confused with what cars is, you would think cars is a crappy spy movie but with cars.
Sorry to get off topic but I don't get the hate for Brave? It's the only Pixar film I haven't seen and people are calling it trash and saying it shouldn't have one an Oscar. I don't get why? It was the first Pixar movie to feature a female protagonist who is a princess and even though I love wreck it Ralph and I actually saw it I just don't know what to say. Does that mean if I see Brave I'm trash?
I almost stopped watching at "I know Incredibles 2 will suck, even though I haven't seen it" because of just how wrong and pretentious that statement was, but overall you make some strong points (even if I do think you give too much credit to the old and too little to the new).
Well...yeah, Incredibles 2 was...okay, but, nothing great, I'd watch the original Incredibles over the sequel any day, the sequel was pretty disappointing.
Moonatik i think he got over hes head on that statement, saying itll be bad without seeing it. BUT he wasnt entirely wrong, the incredibles 2 had some flaws
I'm so sorry, but honestly, while the first half of the video seems perfectly on track, mentioning and listing Pixar's growth both in storytelling as well as fighting to gain its creative independence and breaking technical barriers; the second half feels rather snobby. Cause let's be honest here, if you put the SAME scrutiny you're putting upon films like Coco and Inside Out, really none of their other films will hold up (as you mention). Coco is, by far, one of Pixar's most compelling and visually complex films of all. It's like you're not even aware that putting millions of multicolour light bulbs, as well as clothes and facial expressions to moving skeletons, has been (in words of Pixar's design team) one of their hardest tasks ever, yeah, even harder than putting 430 animated ants in a single frame. They did have to redevelop their animating software and animated techniques in order for a movie like Coco to be technically possible. And that's just the technical part, for you're also entirely overlooking the deeper aspects of the film, such as bringing in an easy/understandable way a really complex cultural tradition to millions of people around the world; one that treats a topic that no many animation studios would be willing to treat so easily, such as death itself.
Well, i agree that Coco was simply beautiful. Definitely a technical achievement. The surface textures and atmospheric lighting was breath-taking. But NitPix has a point in regards to the overarching conflict in Coco's story. I really loved the look and feel of that movie, but the story is reminiscent of Brave. In that character archs are rather flat and the story doesn't really push any nuanced themes. I agree with NitPix that a deeper look at the importance of family or what music can do with instilling memories and cultural vibrancy could have been taken. Inside Out was a lot of fun, and Joy's character arch is rich and meaningful. Yes, there is an excruciating amount of telling and not showing in the movie, but i'm more willing to suffer that for a meaningful character arch like where Joy's wants (to keep Riley just as happy as when she was a child) changes to adopt what she really needs (to understand that life is complex and through empathy, Riley can achieve happiness from without and within).
I wish I could take back finding out about coco, that's the kind of trash I'd expect to come from mexico's bollywood if they could make pixar films. You want to talk about cultural appropriation? That's it. At least the dusk till dawn and mariachi franchises were fun and good, and unique when they released. I hate when studios borrow other cultures without knowing the in and outs, but pretending to, and then don't even make a good film. An example of this from Disney, Pocahontas, it might have inaccuracies or be offensive in some ways, but it called out both sides on their wrongs, and was objectively a good film. Hunchback would also apply.
J Dee Carter gets it. Coco is TRASH, and there are DOZENS of technically more impressive films that came out before coco, and did more, with less. These comments are full of retards who think they know shit about films and animation but don't so i'll just drop 1 example, Avatar. FYI, with each passing year, it gets easier and easier to do what used to cost millions. TH-camrs can make videos of better quality than The Matrix now, for hundreds of dollars, while it cost millions to do half what you can do now for under a thousand dollars back in early 2000.
I think the "telling, not showing" really works for that movie though, because the whole point is that these parts of her brain are the ones actually thinking for her, so they kinda *need* to say it to the audience. They still often mix it in with the girl showing emotion, or what-have-you, so IMO, it all just kinda makes sense. If they were to just "show" it, nobody would understand what was really happening -- though like I said, they did some showing *and* telling, so it wasn't too bad to begin with. Nitpix thinks that was bad, and I whole-heartedly disagree. I don't think you could possibly make that movie without some narration. It just wouldn't work at all.
He is spot on. If you can not see this, then you are not a movie maker and lacking scriptural structuring. Since Disney bought Pixar in 2011 they started, clearly, shifting towards entertaining over forming new experiences. And that is exactly why NitPix is exactly right. And even though COCO was heavier on the new experience part than any of the new ones, it still does not compare to the little details put in WALL-E for example. What did I learn from Coco compared to WALL-E or any of the movies before? Can not be compared. It is in the details. Trying to break new boundaries and teaching NEW concepts. #buyandlarge
BlastOff98 Exactly! What’s wrong with just making an entertaining movie? Even if Pixar’s classic movies are way better than most of the movies from this decade, I think this guy has too high of expectations.
@@BROJANGSTER where "the too high expectations" come from? From the first fifteen years of doing movies. Excellent movies. Everybody's doing "entertaining" and "fun" movies, the mediocre, forgettable films that will still make you buy it. And that sucks. That's the thole point of this video. Of course you are totally OK with it if you are completely satisfied with just fun films.
@@BROJANGSTER Because he is a critic? Its his job to look at movies as more then a bit of time to look at pretty colors, turn off your brain, and eat popcorn.
Coco, Inside Out, and Incredibles Two were all better than Bugs Life. Also the fact that you hold Bugs Life in the same regard as Toy Story and have formed your opinion about Incredibles Two without even seeing it just shows that you're more concerned with criticizing recent Pixar and jacking off old Pixar than giving legitimate criticism. You just kinda brush aside the fact that Cars wasn't great, plus a lot of your critiques of Coco and Inside Out could be applied to early Pixar as well. Pixar has made some sub par movies and you've given some legitimate criticism of those movies. But the irony of this entire video essay is that you started it off by pointing out how unlikely, almost impossible, it is for a studio to make one great movie after another and yet the thrust of your argument is that Pixar has been making good movies in recent years rather than great movies. So what's your point at the end of the day? That Pixar can't do the impossible? They're still making good movies that are better than most of what's coming out other studios so I don't think it's fair to say that they're dead, dying, or even close to dying.
Isaac Shur Tbh, I like "the Good Dinosaur" more than "a Bug's Life" because it, too, pushed the limits on visuals and had characters that just shut up and let the story happen.
Osman Oglu Yeah that’s right. Bug’s Life had the very complex “Hero wants to be an inventor, society doesn’t want him to be an inventor, conflict, resolution, end.” See? It’s easy to make something sound less than it is by simplifying it.
I always forget about the existence of The Good Dinosaur
24 Frames Of Nick that's a thing? Huh
So do I.
24 Frames Of Nick same
The Good Dinosaur is a good movie about the theme of fear. Is not a masterpiece, is not horrible. It is good.
a good dinosaur? barney is not pixar wtf
Whatever you do, Pixar, *you may never touch Rattatoulie. No sequel-making. Shoo.*
ThePaperMask And if you make a shitty sequel to WALL-E, we're through.
Exactly. I mean, I heard the Incredibles 2 is pretty amazing... I will excuse it if they manage to make an amazing sequel for Ratatoulie, and... maybe... Wall-E. Like, it really doesn't need one. It really doesn't, neither does Ratatouile, but, let's see, aye?
Oh we all know it's going to happen.
At the very least, make a miniseries instead if you want to continue Remy's story.
ThePaperMask The incredible 2 is far from amazing. It's definitely not horrendous like the nut job or that bull movie or anything like that but its lackluster and over hyped and no where near comparable to the original. It's a shitty sequel
I was fine with Toy Story 3...
but dear god why Toy Story 4
Toy Story 4 should be a spin off about the romance story between Woody and BeBoop.
LBD Productions That’s the plot of Toy Story 4.
LBD Productions Bebop is dead! >:(
But Pixar wants to tell this love story! *prepare to cry
Commander Shepard she is alive >=(
Inside Out is not about the traditional journey where people travel miles and miles. It’s about an emotional journey that makes it the probably the most mature and deep movie I have ever seen, thus making it my favorite movie.
The plot holes take that away though
Chicken run is undoubtably the best Pixar movie. Walt Disney really did a good job with that one
LOL
It wasn't Disney, it was Platinum Dunes.
Lol
D Fens
Whoooooosh
You realise Chicken Run wasn't produced by Platinum Dunes either, right?
Funny how you bring up how hard it was to animate over 400 ants on screen when the limit previous set with their budget was only 50, yet give no mention to how much work went into animating the octopus Hank for Finding Dory. If you're gonna give credit for production effort, that took a lot of passion to do.
I know right? Or how hard it was to make Violet Parr's hair, The skin textures and accurate guitar playing in Coco, or in Wall-E: the protag, who's head is only a pair of binocular eyes and only speaks in gradations of "waalleee!" (and similarly for EVE), is more emotive than most other characters.
I find that it is also a disservice that NitPix praises the early Pixar films for their success and how quick they put out movies without mentioning the contentious relationship between Dreamworks and Pixar.
Every Pixar movie actually has one very hard thing to animate
the thing you miss is that it was revolutionary at the time, and while the newer animation should also get praised it‘s not the same so maybe think a bit before you judge
Okay, but I have a problem with your analysis of Monsters University. While yes, the Scare Games do ultimately teach Mike and Sulley about teamwork and self-worth and all that, it's a mischaracterization to say it has an entirely generic, overdone message.
Mike wants to be scary. But he isn't. At the end of the film, he's forced to accept that. There's no kid's film BS about how "he tried really hard and achieved his dream despite the obstacles in his way." No. Mike is slapped in the face with the cruel reality that he has to settle for something else. And make do with it.
I think that's a really interesting, subversive message. Plus, I think it's just a fun movie. I don't watch college movies, ever, so the tropes don't wear me out as much as other people, which probably has something to do with my opinion on it. Is it as good as Monsters Inc? Of course not. But don't write it off entirely.
OddTillTheEnd I think it also has to do with the fact that Monsters University is a prequel to Monsters, Inc. People seem to not care about HOW something is done when it comes to movies. The Infinity War characters that died are obviously coming back so some people feel like they can't care about the ending as much because we know they're coming back. The whole point of the next Avengers movie is how they get brought back, how the survivors deal with those deaths, and what they then have to sacrifice in order to undo what Thanos has done, but people don't seem to care about that. We know from Monsters, Inc. that Mike and Sulley are best friends and that Sulley is the one who goes through the doors to scare children while Mike has all the strategies planned out. When Monsters University positions them as enemies with Mike wanting to scare instead of strategize it forces us to look at the story from a different angle. The question of the movie then becomes "how do we get there from here?" but that is for some reason an uninteresting question to a lot of people.
Subversion is interesting?
msnmpn 7 I agree. In regards to Infinity War, the feeling is definitely there that the ending doesn't matter. It would be more of a bold choice to have the villain win if we weren't so completely sure he will be defeated in part two. However, there's something to be said about the shock value of seeing mainstream beloved hero characters get turned into dust while their friends look on in horror. It's a pretty depressing way to end a movie, regardless of how things turn out in the future.
I think you're right that "how" is an uninteresting question for MU, especially when it's the only question. You can, however, argue that James Bond films are so predictable that they are also devoid of most questions except "how". Same with Scooby-Doo. So how can they get away with that?
I think the answer is that both of those are long series where the core engagement is "how". If you're not on board with "how", then you'll just avoid them. Since the original Monsters Inc. explores so many other questions, a film that only explores "how" seems much more shallow.
Bionicelcor Yes. I think subversion is inherently interesting, at the very least, because by its very nature it has to both be different and provide commentary on what came before. If you don't think that's interesting, then we simply disagree.
OddTillTheEnd Commentary or just a reference? There really is no commentary in previous instantaneous deconstruction. If subversion is done well, with the addition of other narrative devices it has the opportunity to say something, but that’s not the case for it alone and for its most recent executions in media.
"The Day of the Dead doesn't tie into the themes"
ah yes, the festivity that is about reconnecting with your family and ancestry and how the living relate to the dead has nothing to do with the movie that talks about family and ancestry and how the living relate to the dead
It's possible to argue Coco has one theme and doesn't take risks, but to say it's themes and setting don't tie together is ridiculous isn't it. That's why it gets you so much emotionally, because it all fits, every bit of the story has come together to earn the ending. You might as well argue the opening scene of Lion King doesn't tie into the themes, which would be equally ridiculous. Also, simple doesn't mean bad. Done well, it often means good.
Yes! I think that while Coco definetely has plot holes, it is an amazing movie none the less. If you look at it from a surface level, Miguel is your average kid that lfollows the heros journey and follows his dreams,etc. However the point of the story is that sometimes family is more important than following your dreams and by that message, it ends up with the family accepting music.
But they dont explore the world very much it's just a location for miguel to goof off in
It’s not even his most stupid complaint
Victory Reviews yeah that house and the boats and the street corners/ alleys are really just places for a character to be and not an environment that was explored!
I think you ripped into Inside Out and Coco our of nostalgia. That fact that Coco follows a simple three act structure isn’t really a criticism. It’s just an observation that it has something in common with most movies, ever. The original Toy Story and the Pixar movies that followed it also played into tropes and cliches. The conflict between Woody and Buzz is a classic new-guy-in-town situation that’s been done many times before.
You also don’t give Coco credit for the amount of creative visual style and flair, or for the fantastic music. La Llorona is a great song that is used as a powerful storytelling device. Without words, a huge change in her character is indicated as soon as she starts singing on the stage. It’s things like these, the creative ways that animated films communicate story, that you praise the earlier films for yet ignore for the new ones. I agree that Pixar’s filmography has become rife with sequels everywhere, but the ones that aren’t sequels are still excellent.
Kodo Elder-Groebe So much why but enough how
Daniel Bathen Ignore him,he's just a pathetic troll who is clearly hungry for 5 secs of attention.
stellvia hoenheim
Shut the hell up ignorant fuck .
stellvia hoenheim
I am sorry you don’t get the attention you need at home
stellvia hoenheim The American Southwest has heavy Mexican heritage in it, as such it is part of America's culture.
I love how he praises Bug’s Life
And then barely skims over Up and Wall-E
And then shits on Coco
Saying it’s only for kids
Even though the movies he liked were released when he was a kid
th-cam.com/video/4KaodqL5OQg/w-d-xo.html
Not Todd Howard that’s your opinion, but Monsters Inc. is one of my favorite Pixar movies
Not Todd Howard That as well young gamer friend risebup lol xddddddd uwu uwu uwu
Did you miss the parts where he directly compared them and outlined specifically where the older movies succeeded and where the newer ones failed?
Bill Murray from The Man Who Knew Too Little hmmm I must’ve missed them Because I have no idea who your responding to or what your talking about
I was agreeing with this video almost 100% until you reached Coco... Coco is a VERY powerful film that wouldn't even begin to be understood by "little little babies". My four year old cousin loved the songs and the colors, but he didn't even begin to grasp why his mother and I were bawling our eyes out when Mama Coco began to sing. My own grandmother had Alzheimer's and had recently passed away when I watched Coco. This film hit extremely close to home and became a more powerful movie than what A Bug's Life will ever be, even given my 20 years old as I watched a "film for little little babies". I think you're being the one driven by nostalgia and the reason why member movies exist, because whenever they innovate and do things RIGHT like Inside Out or especially Coco, someone comes and says "But Toy Story... And Monsters Inc.... And Up..." I love all of those movies but I still allow myself to love some of these new Pixar films as well. I don't think Pixar is dead, I think some people are way too fond of their past and nostalgia and unwilling to accept that a new film might have the same or more meaning than one of the classics. Coco deals with such deep, complex and mature themes that Toy Story, A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc. don't even get close to. If you ask me, death and remembrance of those who are no longer with us is much more mature theme than accepting who you are (as important as the latter might be). And you criticize Coco's villain for being "overly melodramatic"... That was the whole point of it. I now question how skilled you actually are at judging movies that you didn't grow up with.
I watched the movie literally hours before my grandma died
So whenever I watch it
I always cry
Is the mkvie good cause i might watch it
It reminds me of undertale for some reason
Also.. Inside Out wasn't shit. Fight me. I don't care
I fully agree… It's the mentality what yesterday was everything better than today. Inside out is Beautiful. And the world they created is understandable. Sure, you could do everything in an even more complex way, but does that really help the plot? And complaining about characters who are supposed to act as one-dimensional feelings that they are one-dimensional... good job
While Inside Out really didn't have an impact that others got from it, Coco did.
“Day of the dead land just looked interesting, it was nothing” also nitpix “BUGS LIFE HAD FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY ONE ANTS OH MY GOD”
Also NitPix: LiOn KiNg SuX bEcAuSe It RiPs OfF sHaKeSpEaRe
Antboy 925 understanding a joke is really hard
@@antboy9252 but it was completely ripped off of kimba the white lion
because that was pushing boundaries, something which the day of the dead land didnt do
@@alfa01spotivo yeah but are really people starting to bash recent movies graphics just because technology has evolutioned so it was easier to make them? Of course there has to be respect to pixar because they brought something new but don't frame recent movies as "bad" just because they did't have to work with the same resources.
... Toy Story 3 DOES have a character arc. Woody at the beginning thinks the key to happiness is staying with Andy or else they'll all face either being neglected or destroyed, and through the film he realizes that you should let go of what you're used to because the world changes and you should instead find the next happy moment unless you want to wind up like Lotso who only cared about one single kid.
andrewkful ha... just like toy story two.
Justthatguy Jesse?
I was there the whole time yeah
You're absolutely right. Toy Story needed a film in which the Prospectors ominous words to Woody would come to fulfillment. "Do you really think Andy's going to take you to college...Andy's growing up..."
That’s literally the theme in Toy Story 2
The skeleton sidekick is Miguel's grandpa who died after Ernesto de la Cruz murdered him because he didn't want to continue with his singing career therefore leaving Ernesto without new songs to sing. This is also pertinent to the story because Héctor (Miguel's true grandfather) wanted to get back home to his daughter Coco but never did because he died. This lead to Héctor's family thinking he just persued his career and never went back home because of greed or pride... And there's so much more about this movie
The problem isn't that you didn't like Coco, it is actually that you made it seem bland and lacking of a good story when actually it's an excellent movie.
Liz N.S. Yeah but the fact that the dad constantly wrote letters to coco and then they suddenly stopped would raise suspicion. Also Ernesto got famous with the grandpas songs. And the most popular one was COCO’S SONG. So would that also raise suspicion? “Hey I haven’t heard from my dad in a while, and his music buddy is singing his songs...hmm”
Liz N.S. It’s in my top 5 Pixar movies
@@beajack4990 Imelda probably never wrote back to him so its stands to reason that they thought Hector might have just realized it was futile and stopped writing or that he just forgot about them eventually.
22:50 there is visualization to show that Miguel’s other family members aren’t as passionately against music as Miguel’s grandmother is; when she smashes his guitar, Miguel’s dad reacts in a subtle way that definitely suggests that was overkill.
I actually found there was a lot of nuance in all of the character’s traits that the film manages to display in some way, if you pay attention.
I actually really liked Monsters University. I thought the message it sent was unusual and important, that sometimes you just don't have the skills required to follow your dreams, and you need to do something different. And sometimes things go wrong and you have to pay your dues and work hard to take a different path to success. It's very subversive to the typical "happily ever after" and "you can do anything" message we normally get in kid films. I'm actually really disappointed more people aren't talking about this. As an adult who has had things go wrong and had to take alternative paths to success, that recognition meant a lot to me.
Also, as someone who has worked extensively with people with cognitive disabilities, I found Finding Dory more compelling than Finding Nemo, because it showed how having a disability can in fact be a real problem, not just played for laughs, and how important it is to have a support group. I think people are too judgemental of these films.
I didn't knew Monster University pushed a subversive message like that. But I liked it better than "you can do anything if you believe in yourself" bs.
you lost me at finding dory is better than finding Nemo..maybe it means more to you but there is no way its a great sequel.. although i do agree that monsters university is really underrated
@@bloody_outlaw8000 I didn't say it was better, I said I found it more compelling. Same with Frozen 2 recently. I tend to be a little more subjective about my media... Like I can appreciate the technical prowess of a movie or whatever, But the thing that really impacts me is the message. Finding Nemo was undoubtedly an excellent movie and I enjoyed it, and I don't think I have the objectivity to compare it with Finding Dory as far as which makes a "better movie." But the message of Finding Nemo was pretty basic, about parents needing to learn to stop being overprotective, etc. But when have we EVER seen a kids' movie where a character struggles with a mental disability? Because I don't know about you, but Finding Dory was the first I've seen, and they handled it with so much dignity and compassion, it just meant so much to me.
I just made a similair comment like this but you beat me to it! The movie shows that NO you CAN'T always do what you dream of, tough shit but you have to find a way to deal with it. It's oke, go find something else, there is a lot in the world and you are meant for something, just... not what you initially dreamed of!
Also, the movie teaches a parallel moral to this: you can have ALL the talent in the world, but without hard work and a lazy cocky attitude that talent is useless.
For me atleast a compelling lesson or theme dosent really matter when almost everything else was mostly boring and stale.
A somewhat compelling massage dosent save a movie on it's own
Atleast not for me.
The movies were just fine if not a bit bland.But I will concede that the massage in monsters uni is something more movies and shows should tackle..
I feel like you demonstrate a misunderstanding of the holiday when you expect Coco to focus on loss. It’s a celebration of the spirits of the dead, not a funeral
Pe Co the movie makes it clear what the holiday means; if people can’t understand that, it’s their own fault
If you can't follow what the holiday is about when they literally explain it outloud, you're just a big dum dum.
Yeah, I mean, its not like its obvious from all the celebrations, and concert, and generally upbeat atmosphere even among the dead. It even ends on a huge celebration with members of their family, alive and dead.
The reason why Coco is such a fantastic movie is exactly because it brings a topic as taboo as death into children's lives and teaches them to see it as something more than purely loss.
@@Gab98Spyro I feel like that's not exactly a groundbreaking theme though.
“The Day of the Dead doesn’t tie into the themes”
Did you even watch Coco?
But seriously, I see a lot of conformation bias here. A Bug’s Life is hardly some iconic masterpiece, but you seem to be really exaggerating how good the older films were while desperately gripping on to any perceived flaws in the newer ones.
The only thing he focused on "A Bug's Life" was the ambition in animation technology, he barely doesn't even mention anything else about the film. He only used abl to argue that there used to be ambition behind projects. Why the hell is everyone down here saying he said it was a masterpiece?
Calma man, Coco isn't any masterpiece either
Alex Bennet *O P I N I O N*
I liked the movie, but people are allowed to not like movies if they choose.
Yeah this dude comes off as some contrarian tryhard
@@SaidSakpDemir I think that's the point though. He only talks about the technological aspect to a Bug's Life so he woulldn't have to admit that early Pixar wasn't always perfect. Because that would undermine the argument that older Pixar is glorious and newer Pixar just sucks.
"With Inside Out the world design is so poorly put together, it's near impossible to map out the various locations" There's literally a scene where they look over the world of Riley's head and point out each of the locations as if on a giant map.
He means in terms of unique visuals. He already mentioned in the video that each new location is explained through narration.
The villian in coco is bad because:
- He does bad things to achieve his goal
Never heard that in a pixar movie before
That was ridiculous, the "villain" had literally NO REASON to kill is best friend, the real villain was the old bitch that freaked out her family because she's an idiot that never thought on the possibility that her husband was killed
Eugenia Verónica Bonsembiante he did become rich and famous so it did work out for him
@@Alexander-hi8bo I'm not saying that it doesn't worked for him in that very convenient context, I said that it's forced as fuck, because literally NO ONE (except appearently Pixar directors/writers) would have think "Oh, my best friend wants to go home with his family, I guess I'll kill him instead of just making a deal with him so it's a legit win/win"...
See the problem????
Eugenia Verónica Bonsembiante a psychopath would think that
Literally the villain of toy story 2 lol 😂
im only here to keep it real with you chief but the second part of this video really aint it. if bugs life gets a pass but not coco, then its pretty obvious your nostalgia came into play.
which is kinda ironic considering a lot of the video he was actively trying to talk down nostalgia. id say a bugs life was on the level of cars. not to mention how many freaking toys they made of a bugs life. they have a very similar feel.
I would rather watch Bugs Life than Coco
a bug's life actually achieved something while coco didn't, those 2 are similar but remember they were 20 years apart
Aye, the bug movie isn't all that good is it? I never bothered with it so I genuinely don't know
The book of Life is a much better film that takes place on the day of the dead, and it has a much better message. Coco is just a rip off of that.
I'll defend Cars 1 and 3 til I die. Weird how they skipped 2 though.
not you same lol
I mean, Cars 1 is not a bad movie, it just pales in comparison to what they had done at the time. Cars 2 was a complete trainwreck though
Cars 2? Never heard of it 😆
same. and i think 2 was skipped over cos it was so weird theres literally nothing to say about it, even 3 pretended like it didn't happen lol
why do people hate cars 2 I love it I liked the spy movie it was awesome and the 1st is good for me and cars 3 was super good
I feel once Disney got complete control over Pixar, the quality of their movies went down
Inside Out aside, of course
REAL
I finally got around to watching Coco last night (for some reason when it was first out it just didn’t look all that interesting to me), and i have to respectfully disagree with you about it being just for “little little babies” and not for adults at all. The themes in Coco can very much translate to adults, we have all lost someone, we have all been scared of being forgotten after we die. Those ARE NOT childhood themes, so I think you need to maybe rethink what you consider “little little baby” movies.
I think it's just a buzzword for movies he doesn't like lol
I think death and loss are fantastic themes to explore. I would have loved to meet all kinds of interesting characters and dangers in the land of the dead. Each new encounter could teach our protagonist important lessons that all come together in the final act. Leave out the guitar and the shallow villain, focus on the afterworld adventures and loss and you’d have a more focused movie.
The problem isn't that the movie has "childhood" themes - all themes are themes - it's that the way these themes are explored is very poor and derivative. When people say "X" movie is made for kids, they aren't saying the lessons in the movie aren't valuable to everyone, or that . They're saying that "X" movie is so poorly put together that it can only fully be enjoyed by kid, who doesn't have their brain fully formed yet.
Does this mean you can't enjoy a "kids movie"? No of course not. There could be many reasons why. People mature at different rates. Very few people ever end up developing good taste for particular media (let alone decent), so cheap, manipulative clichés don't get them so easily. Maybe you recently experienced loss so you were very biased towards really resonating with Coco. That doesn't distract away from that it could be a poorly told story.
5:45 He meant to say The Good Dinosaur, but the subtitles translated it as Brave. A great subtle joke.
25:07 - Coco takes a lot of risk; it explores the concept of ‘death,’ and more imperatively, it presupposes a specific type of after-life in a way that I’m surprised the devoutly religious didn’t have an issue with. It also gave a relatively detailed analysis of Mexican culture, in one of the most racially divided times - when someone is willing to jump on you for getting the slightest thing wrong, or making something that could be deemed as a ‘stereotype.’ When I actually think about it, in terms of the films philosophical concepts that it explores, I consider it the riskiest film that they’ve ever made, especially with the ending. It wasn’t a technological risk mind you, and maybe that was your point, but I don’t see why that’s necessary.
Also, the film implies everyone will eventually die into nothingness when they are forgotten. The plot then ends up centering around a character not meeting this fate, and they have to ensure that a dementia-stricken, dying grandma doesn’t forget her own father. That’s pretty heavy, if you ask me.
I mean it was a technological risk too, the amount of rendered lights and level of detail put into the background took complete rebuilding of their software, the lighting in the film compared to what our technology was currently able to pull off at the time was something that took a lot of effort to restructure. The difference is Pixar has the money to invest in tech research now compared to when we couldnt fit more than 50 ants in a shot but still it was intentionally pushing new bounds for what can be done in animation. Taking a Digital Lighting for Animation course we talked about what had to be done to get the effect Coco presented and a large amount of the 7 million plus lights placed in each shot of the Underworld scenes were hand placed, all to stay true to the vision of the Mexican graveyards during the day of the dead
I totally agree, I feel he didn't go very deep into Coco's culture and meaning just to prove his point
Gustaff Overshield ITS DISNEY
It’s obvious he doesn’t understand the culture of coco! Perhaps the film was too colorful. Also, he doesn’t understand that the one thing the Latino kids are scared of is their grandma or mom with a sandal.
+Gustaff Overshield-Coco is simply not a good movie. Most of the Mexican culture stuff is unapologetically and insufferably pandering, the story is overly cliched, the design is lazy and overly childish, and most of the family are rotten and absolutely despicable assholes. Rather than being patient and trying to tell her grandson why she doesn't want him to be a guitar player again. . .the grandma yanks it away from him and proceeds to smash it right in front of him. What the actual fuck? Once the kid goes into the afterlife, everything is basically one giant misunderstanding where if the family just sat down and talked to the kid, explained who his great-great-grandfather actually was, a lot of these situations could've been avoided. And also, the family is so angry with the great-great-grandfather over a mistake he has repeatedly tried to right, that they are perfectly okay with allowing him to completely fade away from all of existence. 0_0.
This movie was insufferable. . .up until the second half when. . .something happened. Right after it was established that the spirits can cease to exist entirely if someone forgets them. . .The movie actually got a lot better. The characters were way less pandering cliches and far more fleshed out individuals. And I don't think that was entirely coincidence-this movie had two directors. One of which was Lee Unkrich, and he was the idiot who tried to copyright the title "Day of the Dead,' a traditional Mexican holiday. (Yup, Disney will slap merchandise and property on everything, even an established holiday. . .) The other was Adrian Molina, and since Lee Ukrinch was reported to have stepped down from Coco in order to work further on Toy Story 4. . .it's pretty clear Molina took over the movie in the second half. . .I have never seen a movie where it's pretty clear just where a different director steps in and takes over. . .and actually makes it better. There is definitely a clear point in the movie where it gets significantly better. . .
I'm sure people might be confused and insist, "Well Fera. . .you said the movie eventually gets a lot better. Doesn't that mean it was still a good movie in the end?" Well. . .no. I said it got significantly better in the second half. I never said it got great. The second half is only an indicator of what the movie always should've been throughout the ENTIRE thing. Unfortunately, Molina couldn't completely salvage the massive storytelling problems that largely pervaded the first half and were still not entirely fixed after he took over-The great-great grandmother and the grandmother are still assholes and pure scum. And of course, they have an elaborate chase in the afterlife to retrieve the great-great grandfather's picture, only for it turn out. . .Coco had her father's picture the entire time!?!?!? Wow-not only is that cliched, that is just lazy. . .
Make no mistake-this movie was intended to be as safe and as pandering as possible. If Unkrich was completely left to his own devices, that's all it would've ever been. I am pleased that it got better in the second half-that is usually not something I ever see where a movie does get significantly better later on-but that still doesn't make it a good movie at the end of the day. It should've been a good movie, deserved to be a great one, and it very nearly succeeded later on-Unfortunately, when a soulless husk of a corporation wants to weasel and pander to a "minority" and a white director is smug in believing he knows better with Mexican culture. . .than the actual Mexican filmmaker working on the film. . .there's only so much you can do. It tried, it really did, and I'm glad to say there is some heart left in there. . .it's just not enough. . .
Talk about missing the point with Coco... anything can be simplistic and dumb if you strip away it's context. But Coco is a fantastic movie and deserves all the praise it's gotten, at the end of the day it is a wonderful depiction of a Mexican family and the traditions we have in our country... also bonus points, the movie is even better in Spanish, having so many inside jokes for Mexicans that it's not easily translatable to english, shows to you the care they had making this for it's target audience (Mexicans). This movie became the biggest movie in México in 2017, everybody went to see it more then once when it was in theaters, even some people that don't go to the movies a lot went to see this movie, and when a movie like that can impact a country, I can only say that this will be another PIXAR classic.
+1stNovaTitan - Yes, how dare people talk about how a movie made for their country was good and depicts their culture accurately!
It may have been a good cultural film, but was it as good as other Pixar films in previous years? Was it as good as Finding Nemo? No. Was it as good as Toy Story? No. It wasn't even on a Monsters Inc. level. Pixar did with Coco what every Disney has been doing for the last 20 years and that is pushing out a plethora of foreign related films. Not to say there is anything wrong with that, but it seems forced. It only makes it relatable to people that are familiar with that culture. Instead of shoving it down your throat and saying this is what we do here in Mexico, I want to see some depth. Engage me. I want to see how does Mexico fit into the Pixar universe, not the other way around. I didn't feel that with Coco. On top of that, the storyline became pretty predictable and cliche after 30 minutes.
Zefortuner Indeed. How dare they?
Eh, el Libro de La Vida lo hizo mejor.
1stNovaTitan
...it does dia de los muertos plenty of justice??lmaoo
"No monstrous qualities at all"
*shows building filled with fake teeth and spikes just like in the original*
Yeah, but it's toned WAY down.
NSGrendel subtlety isn’t an art? I came back to this video after a rewatch of Monster’s University and I agree that the worldbuilding is better in the original and that the monster designs here are made more generic (probably bc there’s such a greater number of them? Idk).... but I don’t get the point of how adding monster spikes to everything makes Inc better. Do humans put human ears over everything? Different door sizes? Good worldbuilding. Random spikes??? I really like that building in MU that he showed bc it looks like what a university building might look like in their world. The architecture is very similar to ours, but in a world focused on being scary, it makes sense to incorporate some spikes but in a subtle way. Couldn’t you say the same thing about Mike’s car? Sure I guess. And there’s lots of times MU takes the generic road... the trash food is pretty lame... but I mean is the bad smelling deodorant in the original too different a joke? Idk. My main issue with this video and not just this part of it is how it down plays nuances to make a point. How is an environmental message in Wall•E more of a risk than centering the message around a real world culture of a non white people in Coco? Does he know that the “generic” paper in the opening is part of Mexican culture as well? Idk... it’s like I agree with most of his points but he comes across as so ignorant as he’s making them bc of the way he presents them. And showing a frame of a building with monster designs in an argument about lack of monster designs is just such a perfectly ironic way to demonstrate this lack of nuanced thinking.
"Face it, NitPix. 👈 You lied to us."-Queen, A Bug's Life
Yeah, what everyone else is saying. Spot on analysis until you get to Inside Out and Coco. I've never seen a film so simply and yet completely portray a visual understanding of depression as Inside Out, which I have dealt with most of my life. That movie had me bawling from epiphanies and self-analysis. And Coco had me crying too, and I'm not Mexican. I only mention that to highlight that I definitely don't identify with the themes of family (which many Mexican commenters have pointed out is a fundamental misunderstanding in your analysis). Most of my family kiiiinda sucks and I'm pretty happy that they're not really in my life anymore. But damned if I didn't identify with the themes of finding a way to express yourself in a world that won't let you.
I know you kinda just have to take my word for it on this, but I do not cry at movies easily. It takes a lot. Mostly it takes careful and nuanced writing, and thorough and consistent world building. Honestly, Inside Out and Coco kick the shit out of a couple of the first 10. Now a lot of that comes down to opinion. But one thing seems to be consistent among your commenters, and I agree with it, is this; Those two aren't as good as A Bug's Life? Are you fucking high?
(on a lighter note, I like most of your videos a great deal, including this one, right up until that bad and nit pickin ass ending......ohhhhhhhh...)
I've never related to a comment more. Inside Out was the best Pixar movie. Yes kid's would sure have fun, but adults would get the emotional part and still enjoy.
I just wanted to say that I'm sorry for your depression and your family situation... I hope you can solve both! 💖 As for the latter, however, Coco also shows how the family is the most important thing, as it's necessary to understand and forgive, because anyone can make mistakes, but a second chance isn't denied to anyone... obviously I don't allow myself to to judge, because I don't know you, I don't know your story, I don't know if you and/or other members of your family have tried to be reunited, but I can tell you that, in the end, what you have left is affection and love of the people you care about most, and maybe now you say you are glad you don't have your family around anymore, but maybe one day, you will change your mind... for this I would advise you to try talking to us, to clarify, pulling everything out with tranquility, maybe even trying to make them understand how important the family is,
I would even recommend seeing this movie (never that it could help them, never hurts to try)... obviously mine is just a suggestion (if I can, I try to help anyone the most possible), which you can clearly follow or not, because in any case the choice is yours and I'm nobody to you 😉👍 I add that what you told me struck me a lot, also because I'm very sensitive when it comes to certain topics, like this one, for example, and I can tell you that living with certain weights in, in the long run, instead of making you grow, they destroy you (personal experiences) 💔 Then I repeat: The choice is yours and yours alone, of course
😊💜
Other than you having depression and identifying it in the character, I'm not sure where depression actually is in the movie. I thought the main character was just dealing with her emotions going out of wack and wasn't sure how to deal with it. The whole movie seemed to be about remembering her past and becoming sad that she no longer has that. (I feel like I'm not explaining myself well)
@@cjcathead2468 Honestly, I think this theme is present, but it's not really thorough (the scene that makes me understand this, for me, is when Riley, towards the end of the movie, can't feel emotions anymore)... maybe I'm wrong eh, but it gives me this feeling
🤔
I'm Mexican and I am here to say. Coco sucked, don't praise it just cause it ripped off the book of life. And inside out? It's bland. Besides the literal colors thrown at my face the whole movie feels empty.
With all you criticize Disney for not giving Pixar the production freedom they needed to create some of their later great films, it's probably worth emphasizing that Toy Story as we know it would not exist without two rounds of Disney-mandated rewrites. (And from what I've seen, the first drafts wouldn't be that great.)
Timothy McLean Despite what I said earlier, yes I completely agree with you especially how woody was going to be evil as hell 😱😬
It's also probably worth considering that those mandated rewrites wouldn't be needed if Disney didn't hound the Pixar team with their footnotes on what they want to change and how they wanted the movie to be (edgier and darker) in the first place.
You realise those first drafts ALSO only came about because Disney kept saying "make it darker, make it edgy", right? They were fixing their OWN mistake, not Pixar's.
Assuming that Toy Story as we know it is actually the best possible Toy Story...
Timothy McLean Disney DOES give Pixar production freedom, though.
"Doesn't explore the idea of loss."
The movie has several scenes of this or were you just not paying attention?
I don’t think he actually watched the movie
Plus his lack of cultural understanding does not help his terribly laid out analysis. It’s like he reviews a film without any cultural research.
But is a weak movie...and kinda boring
Eugenia Verónica Bonsembiante It’s neither though.
Ana Moran So he’s basically CinemasSims because he thinks he’s being smart but he’s really not
I think I you misunderstood Coco, the family hating music stuff is a subplot and is not the main focus
Nah fam that literally is the thing that gets the movie going. It’s a B plot not a subplot dude
Plus it doesn’t compare to how Remy’s family didn’t approve of his passion - it was because he was a rat who wanted to be a chef, in human society. Miguel’s family forbid him from playing music due to his great great grandfather abandoning his wife and daughter to be a musician.
Its still dumb tough... And it is what causes the conflict of the film.
I think people look at first generation Pixar with rose tinted glasses, mostly because they watched them when they were little little babies. Those movies really weren't as original and as deep as most people seem to remember them. They were decent enough children's animated movies that broke technological ground. They certainly had more charm than what they've been serving up recently but I guarantee a 6-7 y o child today will grow up thinking Coco is a masterpiece and will lament at how Pixar lost its soul when they release Coco 2: Dia of the Mariachi in his mid 20s.
The Cinema Monologues in the first scene of Finding Nemo, a mother and thousands of children die.
In the first scene of Finding Dory a “super cute” baby loves it’s parents and then gets lost.
There’s a clear drop in quality whether you like it or not.
Exactly my own thoughts.
Top 5 Cartoon I don't equate darkness with quality and light heartedness with fluff.
I haven't seen Finding Dory but I imagine it's generic and derivative. I have seen Finding Nemo and find it to be generic and derivative. Had I seen it age 10 maybe I wouldn't be so harsh, but having watched it for the first time when I was in my early 20s, it really didn't hold up as anything special. It's basically a story we've seen a million times, with characters and arcs seen a million times. It's also probably a rip off of a French comic book called Pierrot the Clownfish.
I don't begrudge anybody for having a special relationship with it, but I also don't begrudge someone that grew up on Coco or Finding Dory for having a special relationship with those movies.
Pixar make very well made, entertaining, mass appeal movies. I don't think the new ones are as bad as people make them out to be (I'd put Inside out as arguably their best film) and I don't think the old ones are as amazing as people make them out to be (I do not understand the love for Monsters Inc. for example).
Claudia Tejero-Rios I grew up with Toy Story but never watched any of the other Pixar films until I was in my 20s. It gave me a strange perspective compared to most people who saw them as kids. As expected I have a real reverence for Toy Story and yet have no love for any of the other Pixar movies of that era. Is Toy Story really heads and shoulders above A Bug's Life or do I just love Toy Story because I watched it a million times on VHS ?
I actually find to whole 2007-2010 period to be Pixar's best in terms of Quality, and I would hold Inside Out as one of their finest work even though it's late era Pixar.
How many movies have you made? Shut the fuck up.
You touch on it at the end, but why didn't you wait until you saw The Incredibles 2 to do this video? No judgment, I just find that to be an interesting choice.
nothing would change, Incredibles 2 it's just terrible, more than I could think of
No idea, because Incredibles 2, to me, felt like an adult movie written for kids. It's not as good as the first one and the callbacks can ruin it but I consider it less of a sequel and more of a continuation of the story.
Luis Gustavo Sodre which is blatant bullshit.
Incredibles 2 plain sucked
End of
I liked I2 personally
If I'm being honest, the second part of the video feels pretty snobby and harsh. A Bug's Life ALSO had a pretty overdone plot, in my opinion it's definitely not one of Pixar's best movies. If that movie gets a pass, how come Coco doesn't?
Amanda Caceres imo, A Bug’s Life is one of Pixar’s weakest films
and like insulting brave? how dare
Yeah it sucks! 😁 I thought it was not even a pixar film😆
Wasnt there a better one called Bugz or something like that
Turtle Anton You mean Antz? I thought it was a better movie then A Bugs Life
I agreed with all of your points until you got to Coco. I’m also fed up with the amount of sequels and “member-movies”, but I must give credit where it’s due. Despite its narrative structure being somewhat formulaic I still really like Coco for its characters, music, art direction and emotions.
I feel this video would sit better if you used “I” statements rather than “you” statements. Because as it stands, I feel you’re trying to pass your opinion off as objective fact. And while I mostly agreed with your points I don’t think this is a good way to argue them.
dude i like your channel but this video is a major nostalgia trip and i'm shocked you didn't see this at any point during the writing or editing process.
I think that generally, the quality of Pixar's work has decreased but I certainly don't think that's the case for Coco and Inside Out. If you applied the same level of overly critical analysis to Pixar's previous work, you would be able to find just as many flaws that we now overlook. Both of those movies are as competent as any example of Pixar's previous work that you hold in such high regard. I think that nostalgia has made you incredibly bias.
I'd like to see people criticise early Pixar, since popular opinion seems to be "a lineup of sacred cows and Cars, and also A Bug's Life exists, I guess." I find genuine, analytical criticism entertaining, regardless of my opinion of the thing being criticised.
The problem with "state of Pixar" video essays is that they all hit the same beats: "Pixar used to make great movies, Cars is a thing that exists, they made more great movies, then Cars 2 came along and ruined everything." I won't argue that Cars 2 isn't a bad movie, even if it is a guilty pleasure of mine and my reasons for disliking the film are slightly different to everyone else's, but once you've seen one video essay, you've seen them all.
People seem very protective of Inside Out because it gave them 'all the feels', but he is right, it ain't that deep really.
I just found Coco to be so boring. The plot was extremely predictable with a story we've seen a dozen times before. I couldn't fathom the family's motivations either. It would have been much more interesting if the family had actually had some real objection to Coco's dream. There could have been real tension between Coco's desires and his family's traditions and values. As it was written the family is just obviously wrong in a way no family ever would be and you're just waiting the whole film for their minds to change. It's manufactured drama that's too artifical to mirror anyone's real experiences.
His name is Miguel.
Smorgas Bord That was uncalled for.
You might say that Pixar is falling with style.
😆😆😆
Well, they're not flying for sure.
Inside Out? Coco? Incredibles 2? Pixar is doing well.
I like you.
@@Stew91 1 out of the 3 movies were good, guess which one?
Basically calling anyone who likes coco or inside out little little babies, even tho you say you understand why people like them, you still dig into them like that several sentences later with complete sincerity
BenIs2Bored I liked them so I guess I’m a little baby lol
Oh no someone has an opinion what a bAby
Please tell me that in the year since writing this comment you learned how to understand dry humor.
you sound like one, so I guess he was right.
I love those movies, I've always been a child at heart, though adults can enjoy childish things whenever they want. These movies are for all ages whether mature or childish 🤔
I’m gonna be honest, I actually really loved Inside Out. I get that you didn’t enjoy it as much or believe that it didn’t really live up to Pixar’s “glory days,” but I believe it revived Pixar. I brought my little sister to this movie and I have to admit, it hit me hard. I felt like a kid again watching Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Toy Story, and etc. I’d probably even put it in my top 5 Pixar movies, which is saying a lot. Though your points are valid about the story telling and the story arc, I believe this was necessary. They were not only telling the story of Joy and Sadness, but of Riley as well. Fitting in two different stories that work with one another is a very hard thing to accomplish, which Pixar did (ofc they did, they’re Pixar). I genuinely felt a connection with Riley and the characters and left the theater very satisfied, which had not happened in a very long time.
MrTheharryson it’s ok to say you loved Inside Out. Snooty film critiques like NitPix are just really critical buttholes that, well, nitpick things and judge movies based on small, minute details.
I loved inside out, just hated Joy. She was so annoying.
@@jikkebouma5512 One could make the argument that that was the point. Joy being the way she is is supposed to show us that Riley is actively suppressing her other emotions, as a result Joy comes off as being a micromanaging, manipulative bitch.
your analysis of CoCo and Inside Out were very weak. You really had to stretch the idea that Ratatouille was better than CoCo. I think you would have been better off acknowledging that inside out and coco were exceptions but instead you lobbied these really odd and super specific criticisms at these movies, which to different extents could be lobbied at all the pixar movies. It's like you did your best to find reasons for calling the movies bad, rather than genuinely believing them to be uninspired or poorly thought out.
CoCo is better in certain regards like the actual visuals and improved animation quality, as well as having a unique soundtrack. However in terms of story beats it repeats the same elements of Ratatouille but with far less engaging characters overall, which is primarily what he was focussing on. From a story perspective Ratatouille does what CoCo was trying to tell but better, it doesn't mean it blows CoCo out the water in every aspect of a movie but for narattive Ratatouille holds up a bit better.
His channel IS called NitPix 🤷♂️
RATATOUILLE IS BETTER THAN INSIDE OUT COCO YOU LITTLE P P HEAD REMY WOULD KICK JOY THAT KID FROM COCO AND YOUR ASS
ok i PERSONALLY liked Ratatouille more but like CoCo was amazing
@@Gorgonzolacheese12 lmao
It’s worth noting that at the core of every Pixar movie is an essential question that informs the entire movie.
Toy Story- What if Toys had feelings?
A Bug’s Life- What if Insects had feelings?
Toy Story 2- What if more Toys had more feelings?
Finding Nemo- What if Fish had feelings?
Monsters Inc.- What if Monsters had feelings?
The Incredibles- What if Superheroes had feelings?
Cars- What if Cars had feelings?
Ratatouille- What if Rodents had feelings?
WALL-E- What if Robots had feelings?
Up- Why tf am I crying?
Toy Story 3- Why do I dread existence?
Cars 2-uh
Brave- What if The Scottish (not Irish ffs) had feelings?
Monsters University- What if students had feelings?
Inside Out- What if Feelings had feelings?
The Good Dinosaur- What if Dinosaurs had feelings?
Finding Dory- What if a Pixar movie received critical acclaim but sucked?
Cars 3- What if a Pixar movie was good but critics didn’t dig it?
Coco- What if Mexicans had feelings?
Incredibles 2- what?
Alan Gohel Big Hero Six isn't a Pixar film.
Up-what if old people had feelings?
sgtfrozty shut
Mando Garcia I think that one would also be, “Why tf am I crying?”
Alan Gohel definitely
16:18
The purple guy's name is "Art."
What makes me remember him is Charlie Day's voice
It took a biut of thinking but i can name all of those characters
Coco has an incredibly different message than what you think. Miguel, in the end, is willing to give up his dream for his family. He goes through the character arc where he sees family as more important. He does get to play music but that is only because Imelda has a character arc where she accepts that music should be allowed in the family. Not only this, but when you say Miguel has no personality, I completely disagree. He is one of the Pixar characters that I’ll remember and he is absolutely hilarious.
In other words, the moral is "Let your family crush all the soul and spirit out of you"? That's a pretty shitty moral.
Not really. Miguel learns a lesson that family is important and although he valued it before, after his journey he learns to value it even more. His family don't 'crush all the soul and spirit out of him,' he just learns their reasons for why they hate music (granted it is a pretty stupid reason)and learns to accept that family comes first sometimes.
@@PassiveSmoking it's traditionalism. Family is important
So basically it's Tangled painted over with Mexican culture.
I mean, Tangled wasn't really about learning to value family. The person who Rapunzel thought was her mother actually kidnapped her as a child. I guess you could argue that Rapunzel learns to value Flynn but I don't see how that relates to learning that family is important. Also it's not 'painted over with Mexican culture.' The day of the dead makes the perfect setting for a film about learning the importance of family because the whole point of the 'ofrenda's' (the family trees) are about remembering family and what they did to get you into the position you are now. Excuse me if I'm wrong but, I'm not sure anything like the 'ofrenda' happens in other cultures.
I was completely on board with everything you said until you came at Coco and Inside out.
those movies are for mexicans
@@b13sem pretty bold coming from a clown with a Ugandan knuckles profile picture over a year after the meme died
@@traffic9518 That was bait...-.-
I liked Cars
Change my mind
@@myskelimask5515 no
This Was Great Until you got to Inside Out and CoCo imo
Yeah,he doesn't give a shit about those movies! What a cheap badtard!
I didn't even know that CoCo existed until is saw it on Blu-ray and bought it. Either they didn't advertise it much or I missed them all.
@@my3dviews I only saw the Teaser Trailer 8 months before it released, it wasn't advertised that well imo, it's a really good movie tho.
@@ojeinoway6968 It's one of them, that I most likely will watch again as it has a fairly good story. I have all of the Pixar movies on Blu-ray (or 3d if they were released), and have only watched a few of them more than once. Up, is one of my favourite ones.
Book of life is better in my opinion
I really can't get behind this, like of course cars 2, the good dinosaur, and brave sucked, but a lot of his points just show a blatant misunderstanding of storytelling and movies in general. His only criticisms of inside out that he expands upon are that the headquarters are designed in a boring way and that everything is literal, but anyone who watched that movie can tell you that 1) the design of the headquarters hardly matters, 2) the entire movie is stuffed with metaphor on metaphor of so many themes, story details, and representations of human psychology. He also claims that inside out isn't successful because the world design makes it so the audience doesn't know where the characters are so it makes it hard for them to believe the hardship of the journey they've been on but like, that's not true at all. Once again, anyone who watched the movie and actually paid attention can easily tell you that all the locations can be seen and tracked in a way that's easy to follow, but in all honesty that doesn't really matter, because that's not the point of the movie. It's not a literal journey like taking the ring to Mordor, it's a thematic journey to learn about the importance of sadness and negative emotions. His critique of Coco makes even less sense because it's not a critique, he just lays out the story structure in a very literal way without actually explaining why he thinks these things are bad. The only critiques he expands upon in Coco is that the family hating music because they believed Hector walked out on them to pursue a career in music is unbelievable and stupid, which is a subjective take but at least one that makes sense. But he also talks about how it never feels like Miguel was ever in any trouble or learned any lesson but, the movie isn't about Miguel learning a lesson, it's about the importance of familial support and familial relationships, and this lesson is leaned through Miguel's family. I know this sounds like a butt-hurt nostalgia ridden crybaby whining because someone made a video online calling a movie bad but the reason I'm commenting at all is because he never actually explains the problem with most of these movies, and when he does it makes so sense. I actually wanna try and see where he's coming from to test my own vision of how I see these movies but Everytime I think of what he's saying it makes less and less sense each time. If anyone would care to try and explain his points in a different way or maybe more clearly that would be a big help.
Nah, I'm 100% with you. I actually agree with quite a lot in this video, but his critique on Inside Out and especially Coco don't make any sense. He's basically saying that Coco is bad because it's the same story as Ratatouille but without any subplots and more lollygagging (what?), and he fails to address any issues in the older Pixar films. While they're all still amazing, they aren't all flawless. Espacially Up, in which he acknowledges the amazing opening but conveniently ignores the rest of the film, which actually is just a bunch of lollygagging and wacky hijinks. Even though he brings up valid points, it really comes off as just "hurr, everything was better back in my day".
yeah idk about yall, but coco is so so much better than a bugs life. i cannot tell you half the story of a bugs life because there's too much going on. Coco is so much more than he portrayed it as
@@AVdE10000 Coco isn’t even super similar to ratatouille, other than it deals with the main characters families disapproving of their passions. But Remy’s father disapproved of it because they were RATS in human society, the concept of a rat being a chef does admittedly sound ridiculous after all. Miguel’s family disapproved of music due to Hector leaving Imelda and Coco to be a musician, and Imelda’s hatred was passed down through the following three generations of her family.
@cat snake ok how
CARS WAS AWESOME....CARS 2 you could make a case
Exactly, I don't know why the movie gets so much hate. That movie was my childhood man
@@maxwelihecker481 it's haters are
20 year old toy story worshipping neckbeards who bash on it because "it's for kids" and they blame it because they think it was made to sell toys which is obviously false since is toy story is about freaking toys yet they treat it like god and don't say it's a cash grab
@@maxwelihecker481 😂🤣
I think it was okay, but definitely not one of the best Pixar's works. Cars 2, yeah, that's bad. I never got myself to see Cars 3, so I can't say anything about it.
@@Yoseqlo1 I would recomend watching cars 3, it is a great sequal to cars (let's just ignore cars 2), without spoling anything cars 3 deveops well on the story from cars while still keeping the original focus.
you gotta remember that we were children too when the original classic pixar movies came out we just grew up im sure the next generation sees their movies the way we did back then
You are assuming everyone commenting grew up with the original Pixar films. Not true. I watched Finding Nemo when I was at university and adored it for it's world building, character development and story telling, not to mention it's beautiful moving soundtrack. So watching Finding Dory also as an adult, I can claim I am watching it without a child's nostalgic bias. However, no matter how much I wanted to like Finding Dory, it can't hold a candle to the finesse and care to attention as the original created. So I believe the point holds regardless of the age the person was when they originally watched it.
I mostly agree about the sequel shenanigans. Bunch of the rest comes across as nostalgia bias tho.
Also, it's near impossible for Pixar now to "stretch the limits of 3D Animation" since this technology has been massively improved in those years. And if you wanna talk about storytelling.. well, Inside Out on itself is such an simple idea that I had no idea they could stretch it out for a full-length movie... but they nailed it and it makes for a very creative & cult movie imo!
Well, that's your opinion.
Pretty spot on, the Coco part I mostly don’t agree with but I understand what you mean. Good shit
He just hates coco and is trying to paint it like some big brain Iq take when it's not that deep
NitPix grew up with Pixar
T E L L T H A T T O Z O D S S N A P P E D N E C K
E
L
L
T
H
A
T
T
O
Z
O
D
S
S
N
A
P
P
E
D
N
E
C
K
God can this meme ever stop? It is literally Z-tier.
Panteria Tell that to Zod's snapped neck
Yeah yeah sigh
And then ToyStory 4 will kill all faith in the franchise.
On my list of Top Pixar movies, Coco is #2/21
A Bug's Life is #19/21
In my ranking:
Coco is #1/21
A Bug's Life is #19/21
@@flowersoul6894 It is really good, but I love Monster's Inc. so much. It's always been my favorite. But once I saw Coco, it immediately knocked Up to 3rd for me and it shot right to 2nd place haha.
@@tgguitarguy Don't worry, I understand and it's great!
Everyone has his own movie of the heart, after all
(think that Coco has become my favourite movie *EVER,* for example, and never happened to me before, despite my crazy love for Animation and Cinema
), and by the way, I love Monsters Inc. so much! I love all the Pixar movies and pretty much all the animated movies I've ever seen! So I really have no problem with this movie, absolutely!
💖 In truth, many Pixar movies are pretty much on par! If I can make a ranking, it's only for infinitesimal details (in the Pixar ranking with parity, both A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc. are in 4th place, Coco in 1st)
... here is my ranking with parity
(I have particular tastes, I know):
1) Coco
2) Up, Cars 1/3, Brave
3) Inside Out, Finding Dory/Nemo, Wall-E, The Good Dinosaur, Toy Story 3
4) Monsters Inc., Monsters University, Toy Story 1/2, Ratatouille, Cars 2, A Bug's Life, The Incredibles 1/2
I look forward to seeing Toy Story 4 and, next year, Onward
💜 Instead what is your ranking of Pixar movies (with parity or not)? I'm curious
😊
@@flowersoul6894 Oh boy this was hard to rank but here you go.
1.) Monster's Inc.
2.) Coco
3.) Up
4.) The Incredibles
5.) Wall-E
6.) Toy Story 2
7.) Finding Nemo
8.) Toy Story
9.) Incredibles 2
10.) Ratatouille
11.) Monster's University
12.) Toy Story 3
13.) Inside Out
14.) Cars
15.) Finding Dory
16.) The Good Dinosaur
17.) Cars 3
18.) A Bug's Life
19.) Cars 2
20.) Brave
@@tgguitarguy I understand you, you know? I'm not good at making rankings either, even though I love so much doing them! (in fact sometimes them change ahahahahah)
😂🤣 I see that in some places we coincide! I'm sorry to see Brave in last place! I know it's not their best movie, but I really love it! While I love watching movies like Coco and Up so high 💜 Here is my current ranking of Pixar movies without parity:
1) Coco
2) Up
3) Cars
4) Brave
5) Cars 3
6) Inside Out
7) Finding Dory
8) Wall-E
9) Finding Nemo
10) The Good Dinosaur
11) Toy Story 3
12) Monsters, Inc.
13) Monsters University
14) Toy Story
15) Toy Story 2
16) Ratatouille
17) Cars 2
18) A Bug's Life
19) Incredibles 2
20) The Incredibles
I'm sure that both Toy Story 4 and Onward will be in the upper part of my list, I can feel it! They attract me a lot for many reasons, and I hope they will fully satisfy me
💖
I feel you didn't really give the fairest of all criticisms to Coco. The characters certainly touch more themes than you seem to imply. You're ignoring the relationship between Hector and De la Cruz, for some reason, for example.
As a whole, there's themes of the meaning of family, obligations, relationships beyond mutualism, sacrifice, human finitude, liberty, class division and general unfairness (notably; famous people get to live longer...), etc...
Thank you! Your high praises towards Coco absolutely outshine NitPix's bullying criticisms towards that film and other recent Pixar films like Cars 3, Finding Dory, Inside Out and to the least extent, Monsters' University and The Good Dinosaur.
Noah coco sucked balls
I just think this guy can’t probably analysis films that are well nuanced if he forgets about themes themselves. He seems to be focused on the golden years. It was an okay video
Ah yes having a different opinion on a film is bullying isnt it Kieran...
Just a reminder Coco broke ground with new lighting technology
So did Avatar but who cares about that anymore?
Sean S Avatar isn’t Pixar
did it break ground with anything else
@Nick Pelayo,Avatar was made by Fox who is now owned by Disney who also owns the Pixar films so they're sort of the same with the lighting technology?
this is a joke right? you sound like Prequel fans. i hope you're an RLM fan.
I've always hated Monsters Inc. Not because it's a bad movie, it's a fucking fantastic movie! But fucking Mike Wazowski. This guy led me to the revelation that I basically can't see green. When leaving the movie my family was talking about it, and everybody kept saying the green guy, the short round green guy.
I had no idea what the fuck they were all talking about. When I finally realized what character, I was in disbelief that they all thought he was fucking green. He is not even the lightest bit green, or at least what I recognize to be green. So ya, did a test afterwards and found that I can barely see any green. I have a very small amount of green detection, but apparently not much.
Aw man I’m sorry😂
What colour was he then for You? Black and white?
Carroscrianca
grim the reaper, did you even read my post? Why would I see him in black and white if I only have trouble seeing green? That condition would be called Achromatopsia, and it is extremely rare. It really isn't even known if they see truly in black and white. The way the eye works, it would make more sense if they can see only different shades of either red, green, or blue. To see in genuine black and white would likely be caused by a neurological issue rather than a physical problem with the eye.
My condition is deuteranomaly, an inability (or reduced sensitivity) to see green light. I can still detect green a little bit. So only very strong greens I can see as a distinct color. It is fairly hard to describe this accurately. I see color the way I've always seen it. The only reason I know that I can't see green very well is because that's what the eye doctor told me.
But anyways, to answer your question, I recognize Mike as yellow. I've been told he is actually a yellow-green color. I do not see even the slightest hint of green in him, not at all.
Wtf does grass and trees look like to you, homie?
I feel like nostalgia is giving you a little biased look onto the subject
But the newer ones do suck. A studio going from producing original films to producing mostly sequels suggests a lack of ideas.
Random Ashe idk this whole video seemed really nit picky, and I guess I shouldn’t be surprised but I thought the name was ironic or sarcastic or something. I get the feel that he fixates on all the negatives in these movies, which are legitimate and well argued, but it makes his argument come across as a snap judgement he made early on and then proceeded to cherry-pick evidence to support his opinion.
@@arandombard1197 sure but before they didn't have any movies to make sequals for
So the only option was to make original ones😂😂😂
Well ultimately thats how all reviews work. There is no such thing as an objective review and if a critic ever suggests that they are being objective, they're lying. We like or dislike things for various reasons, with better critics being able to rationalize it better. They all felt like legitimate points that I agreed with so I don't think they can really be called cherry-picked.
@@arandombard1197 all i'm saying is that their new movies aren't pure garbage as he says (i guess i should say "imo")
I love how you bashed Coco yet didn't even touch upon how boring and lackluster A Bug's Life was plot-wise. It performed well, and at the time it was technologically mindblowing, as you said, but I bet that if you asked anyone who saw it the names of 4 characters from that film they wouldn't be able to tell you. You really shouldn't be giving free passes to the older movies just because they're from an era of generally good films.
A common flaw with cartoon reviewers these days is that they don't take off their nostalgia lenses before reviewing, and you're falling into that exact trap. As someone who's been watching cartoon reviewers for the past eight years, I really hope you consider this feedback, because I do think you have potential to stand out from all the other manchildren on this site.
I was thinking the same thing. Coco is BY MILES better then a Bug's life yet A Bugs life got a free pass. Coco is an amazing movie. But like someone said before me. Any movie's plot will seem dumb or uninteresting if you strip away the context. Miguel's journey is much more important that that of Remi for instance. What does Remi have to loose? The restaurant shuts down, Remi and Linguini move on. Miguel doesn't succeed... The whole family keeps on hating on Hector, he disappears in the afterlife and Miguel is dead. I'd say his journey is far more epic than Remi's. Also the scenery in COCO is amazing I don't care what you say.
@ Katie G, "but I bet that if you asked anyone who saw it the names of 4 characters from that film they wouldn't be able to tell you."
Four characters are Hopper, Dot, Flick, and Thumper (and I was able to tell you that *without* doing any research and having last seen the movie years ago). A Bugs Life may not be the most memorable, but I'd still put it leagues above The Good Dinosaur. A Bug's Life at least has an interesting and menacing villain. Hopper is a bully, but he's not one-dimensional. He loves power and being in control, but he realizes how powerful his enemies truly are, and exercises caution in wanting to keep the ants in line (realizing that an ant had stood up to him *months* ago, wanting to kill the queen to further put the ants in their place, etc).
Also, there are plenty of other good cartoon reviewers on this site: hotdiggedydemon, alphajayshow, Rebel Taxi, PieGuyrRulz, Shadow Streak, Animat (who even with some of his flaws he's been learning), etc, all take off their nostalgia goggles and review things fairly. There are plenty of cartoon reviews on this site that aren't "manchildren".
@@winnetouch foh a bug's life is a classic. I literally watched this movie 300 times probably more when I was a kid. And if it was playing on TV rn I'd definitely keep it playing as background noise and pay attention at the interesting parts, like when they build the fake bird, or when hopper intimidates and LITERALLY KILLS one of his own gang members by dumping a buttload of nuts on him. Or that crazy finally. I mean just cause you don't like doesn't mean you're right. I will defend a bug's life till the day I fucking die buddy. And yeah I may not be able to name 4 characters of the top of my head, but I can fuck your bitch. Haha remember that vine... good times... good times
First of all... older movies don't necessarily get free passes... but new mediums really do. There's a lot to dislike about the Wizard of Oz, for instance.
A Bug's Life, however, wasn't a boring movie in any way. Sure it's skeleton... the outcast that returns to save the villiage... has a crush on a girl out of his league and gets the girl... makes interesting new fellow outcast friends who help him on his journey, blah blah blah... yeah. It's been done. However, most pop songs use the same 4 chords. It's not really any different. The outcast to hero arc is a VERY popular arc for protagonists. Get over it.
The voice acting was tremendous. The world development was an absolute game changer (the technology didn't exist up to then to have real tactile looking objects that are so clear in quality that you can show their function without telling. For instance, the part where water droplets were served at the bar... they didn't have to tell you what it was. They showed you what looked to be a bartender serve it, and it showed the texture and jiggly physics of it, and it showed the insects injesting it. Only somewhat possible in cartoon form.
THAT is what the CGI medium was most fascinated with in the old days. Scaling down. Scaling up. Creating world specific technology and appliances, etc... CGI was a way to immerse people into a new world physics without limits, and Bug's life was GREAT at that... as opposed to the heap of garbage nobody seems to remember called "Antz" which was bland, uncanny, and quite frankly a day late and more than a dollar short in terms of execution.
So yeah... A Bug's Life... maybe you didn't personally like it... I personally didn't like Space-Balls... but that's simple unappreciation of the merits of the movie. In my case, I'm not a big sci-fi fan... don't like Star Wars... or Trek... so a parody of this genre just doesn't appeal to me, but I can see where it's a good movie. Well, if you don't like traditional hero arc based stories that focus on designing worlds over story... too bad for you. Don't watch Bug's life. But generic story lines are ideal for family movies (because children watch them) Using a generic storyline is only really sinful if you aren't considering the audience, or if the movie purports to be cerebral in nature. Bug's life isn't a cerebral story. It's an immersive adventure story. Get over it.
Yeah but it's a classic in your mind because you watched it 300 times. Some other kid is going to have the same argument about coco in about 20 years. Just because you watched it as a kid doesn't really make it a masterpiece.
"Coco is for baby's"
**Coco litrilly throws the main character off a building**
Yeah, and Wile E. Coyote falls off cliffs and has mountains fall on him. Your point?
@@jamesgrettoons414 Add a Soul Stone plot and the scene would've been dramatic :p
@James Grettons,its funny how Coco and Avengers Infinty War are both owned by Disney🤣🤣🤣
Literally is literally spelled literally.
It's for baby's because it's so bland and simple.
I can’t believe it’s taken me this long to watch this. I like some of your other videos and this one kept popping up in my recommendations.
Anyway, most of what I have to say has kinda already been said in some of the other comments but I’ll add my bit anyway.
I didn’t have too many issues with the first half of the video or a lot of your points on sequels that have come out. It’s when we get to your reviews of Inside Out and ESPECIALLY Coco that things kind of start to fall apart.
While I liked Inside Out, I could at least understand some of the critiques you made about it. But when you started talking about Coco, I started to wonder if we even watched the same movie. You basically simplified a lot of what actually happens in the movie to make it sound more uninspired than it actually is (ex: just simplifying Ernesto as an “overly melodramatic villain” when there’s far more to him than that.) And I find it odd that you criticize a lot of the 2010 era Pixar films as being uncreative in terms of visuals and then just lump Coco in there despite it having arguably some of the best visuals that I’d say are more than on par with previous Pixar films in terms of visual creativity. Also, you can take any Pixar film (any film in general really) and break it’s story down to its bare bones to find stories that have already been told before. “A Bugs Life” is literally based off “Seven Samurai”. A movie isn’t bad or “only meant for babies” because it uses a familiar story. Thats only a problem if it doesn’t bring anything new or interesting to the table.
While I’d rather not assume your motivations, it seems you only talked about Inside Out and Coco this way so they’d better fit within your argument that “all Pixar movies after 2010 are trash” Look, I agree. As a whole, Pixar’s recent bunch of movies haven’t been as strong as what came before. But studios like Pixar have their eras of ups and downs. Disney had the Disney Renaissance and then followed it up with a bunch of less successful movies in the next decade. I think because most of us (at least within my age group) are old enough to remember seeing Pixar’s older films in theaters when they first came out, it’s easier for us to spot when there’s a downgrade in quality. Not trying to say studios shouldn’t always try to push the boundaries of quality or anything like that. I’m just saying that some of your arguments may be based more on your gut emotional reactions rather than the actual quality of the movies you talk about. You even state yourself that a lot of the movies you talked about aren’t bad objectively
LeaXoftheUnderworld2 what’s seven samurai
I wouldn’t say they’re dying, but they’re definitely going through some growing pains. Especially with the higher ups shifting around in the fallout of the Lasseter scandal. Inside Out and Coco show they definitely still have that spark. Maybe this is what they needed to shake things up?
Wyatt The Nerd
Scandal?
zachanikwano There were a lot of sexual harassment allegations and he will be leaving at the end of the year. Pete Docter will be taking over as the chief creative officer when Lasseter leaves. Check Google News and you’ll find several articles about the allegations cause damn there are a lot of them.
Wyatt The Nerd Sweet merciful crap! If these scandals keep going we'll have no one left in the entertainment industry. (Not that I'm dismissing the allegations of course.) But it's become almost like a game to guess who's going to fall next.
@@someonerandom8552 There are allegations, but seriously, they are ridiculous from what I have heard. Lasseter is a hugger. And you can dislike huggers, but throwing him out of the company he created for it...Pixar deserves to go bankrupt. I wouldn't be surprised if some jealous people did sling those accusations around out of jealousy. Lasseter for one took some of his people with him and is still doing movies and will release one soonish from what I have heard. There is even a trailer out.
Where you lost me. "And now the Incredibles 2 is out in the UK. I haven't seen it yet, but I already know that it is going to be a passive uninteresting experience which achieves nothing new."
This is where I take umbrage with you as a critic. When you sit down to watch Incredibles 2, I am assuming you will, you are walking in predisposed to a certain point of view. You should walk in a bit more open than that. If I walk into a movie expecting it to be passive and uninteresting then I probably won't enjoy it very much regardless of how good it may be.
I'm more interested in why he didn't make this video _after_ watching I2. And yeah, I guess his opinion would become confirmed anyway but that way he could at least provide some insightful commentary. And this video would remain 100% up to date all the way until the release of TS4 next year.
A weirdly missed opportunity.
I would disagree with that sentiment, I don’t think anyone goes unbiased into a film unless you literally know nothing about the film, the creative team or the studio behind it before viewing it. We immediately form expectations when we see anything from a piece of media, even just knowing the title of a movie or tv show gets us speculating on what to expect. It is the job of filmmakers to either meet these expectations or subvert them and the best filmmakers/studios are able to control what the general expectations of a person are before entering the theater through information given through advertisements.
He was right though, word for word. I had no such predisposition, and the the film was bland in comparison to the first. "Remember when the supers all did all those things? In the first one?" He used his knowledge of how sequels work in the industry to predict the tone of the film. You know what helps people walk into movies more open and not pre-judging? NOT SPITING OUT SEQUELS year after year and setting a trend for low quality that you fear walking into the theater.
@@GuitarLover297 Your entire reasoning is flawed. You try to make the Incredibles 2 out to be a 'member? Movie, but the way you point it out is literally ragging on it because it still has superheroes. Its like me saying that Toy Story two was bland and uninteresting because "remember when the toys did that thing where they are alive? Remember?" Toy Story 2 might be bad, but not for that reason.
It’s a good movie but the secondary story with Dash and Violet fighting is the exact same as the first movie and is even acknowledged in the movie itself besides that Incredibles 2 is just as good as the first one.
Have to disagree with you on Coco, the world inside the movie is deeply inspired by Mexico (I am mexican) and our culture, its not just THERE because it can.
Long explanation on mexican culture ahead:
The place where Miguel and their family live is inspired by the town Mitla, Oaxaca, where zapotecans believed it was the land of the dead, there even is a temple in honor of the god of death in there.
Ernesto lives in a palace, similar to Palacio de Bellas artes in Mexico city, rich in color and full of detailed symbols.
The world of the dead is inspired by Guanajuato and its endless, spiraling streets. A city rich in color and artistry. Connected to the living world by a path of flowers petals (Xempasuchil) which are used in the day of the dead to guide spirits back home.
The world of the dead exists since centuries ago, the mayans believe that cenotes (the place where Miguel is thrown into) is the path to the death realm. Where does Miguel and Hector get thrown into? a Cenote, and their family alebrije saves them! That alebrije has the main shape of a Jaguar. Jaguars were believed to be the only ones able to pass to the living and death world freely, thanks to the mayan god Balam, which is a JAGUAR.
But I guess this all is just "another pretty place to run in."
Mexico is infinitely rich in culture and it always angers me that people just see my country at face value and believe the only cute place to go to is Cancun.
I will always be grateful towards Lee Unkrich and the team dedicated into the movie for portraying my country so beautifully.
Well said!!!
25:11 This line right here comes dangerously close to undermining everything you said previously. You can''t just go into each new Pixar movie and look for ways that it fits your narrative or it just looks like confirmation bias
And wouldn't you know it, he was right
Mmmm...Idk, some of these points seemed like double standards. For example, you complain about Inside Out not having a rich enough world, but then you complain about Coco not being as good as Ratatouille despite it having much more distinct visual storytelling. It also takes a much different look at the concept since the family does actually have an understandable reason for their resentment toward the main character's passion, while Remy's family is boring and forgettable. The villain in Ratatouille is also trash, while the villain in Coco is genuinely surprising and threatening.
You can make any film sound better or worse if you focus on very specific elements, but to someone who's seen all these movies, you sound biased. It seems like you like older Pixar because that's what you grew up with and you just don't like Coco and Inside Out as much because they're newer. You really think Toy Story is a far more mature story than either of those? It's a fantastic movie, don't get me wrong, but calling Coco and Inside Out "baby movies" in comparison to Toy Story of all things.
Also, you didn't have any criticism for A Bug's Life? Really? What deep nuances did you see in that film that made it a classic that's far more memorable than anything from new Pixar? I mean, it's fine if you like it, but that film is very forgettable. Let's be honest, people don't talk about that movie like they do Toy Story or Finding Nemo. There's a reason it's one of the movies that hasn't gotten a sequel. It also seems weird how Disney's meddling was a good thing when it gave us the Toy Story everyone knows and loves, but it's a bad thing once sequels are involved.
You're entitled to your opinion, but this script sounds a lot like some old man complaining that "things were better back in my day!" It's like your nostalgia makes you more forgiving of films you grew up with, so you don't criticize A Bug's Life, but now that you're an adult, you can criticize Coco and Inside Out all you want and claim Pixar is dead.
I know I'm just repeating myself, but I wanna make sure that I'm being clear. I'm not accusing you of being a nostalgia junkie. I'm just saying that's what this script sounds like. I'd recommend making sure your points are more balanced in the future so you can better argue your case. When your judgment is skewed in favor of one side, those who notice are more likely to dismiss your entire argument.
he didnt like coco cuz there were mexicans in it...lets be real
sodaandcookies1 I don’t think that’s the reason. Why is everything about race? He didn’t like the movie, some people in this world didn’t. I personally really like Coco, it’s beautiful and made me cry multiple times. It has nothing to do with race. I wish people these days didn’t assume that everyone is a mindless bigot.
@@fullofmischief2505 we cant rule it out, so more than likely it is
sodaandcookies1 In some cases we can’t, but in this case it’s obviously not racism. Reading through the comments section some other people seem to think it’s racist as well. If the first thing that comes to your mind is racism when someone doesn’t like an ethnic movie, then that’s on you. Its more telling about you than the person you’re putting that label on. Again, everything in this world is not racist.
@@sodaandcookies1 Nah it was just ass
To the point about Coco, I don’t think you actually took time to really dissect it. I don’t consider myself a critic, but pretty much instantly I understood the multiple messages the film was trying to get across.
First off, the kid wants to be a musician, when his family are staunchly against him doing that, due to his dead grandfather betraying them a long long time ago. If you don’t understand why this is interesting, you probably haven’t been in a Mexican household, because this grudge holding mentality is very real in those types of households. Especially if it relates to their family being betrayed. Plus, there are moments where he is clearly being selfish, or pursuing this just to spite his family, and that’s very different for a character to act selfish in a Pixar film. Also, there’s the M Night Shayamalan twist at the end, which I won’t reveal for the 3 motherfuckers who haven’t seen it. On top of that, there’s also a moment where he’s willing to put his family first and give up music to keep his grandfather alive. If that is not tearjerking storytelling, I don’t know what is.
The movie’s great, dog. I’m not normally a guy to say this, but stop hating. They hit a slump for a second, but they’re far from dead.
Tearjerking storytelling =/= good storytelling
Gala
Actually, it does equal good storytelling. As a person who writes stories, creating a story that gets somebody to cry at the end, means that you already have to have an emotionally gripping story. Also, before you do your contrarian thing - YES - an emotionally gripping story is a good story. It’s not easy to hold people’s attention to a story, let alone create a story that people emotionally relate to.
With all this being said, if you’re still gonna be a contrarian, try to write a story yourself & show it to people. Better yet, try to write an emotionally gripping story & show it to people. I think you’ll be fed a heavy dose of reality.
Yes. If you can't make people feel things as a storyteller you're a bad fucking storyteller.
BowditchXD I mean, if a story makes people cry it doesn't make it automatically good. Twilight made people cry, and It isn't a good movie. Look, I've cried with some movies because I was emotionally invested, but that doesn't make them any better.
BowditchXD And if you only write stories to make people cry, let me tell you that you're not a very good writer. You could write a story about a kid with cancer, and even if it is the worst story ever, people will cry, you know why? Because it's a kid with cancer, just like a woman with demencia remembering his dad, it's manipulative and cheap.
I always was upset about "how did they hang up the pictures" ever since I first saw cars. That whole world doesnt make sense.
The forklifts of the Cars universe are slaves. That's how.
I think you missed the point of Finding Dory. It isn't about finding her parents, it's about finding her self. The inciting incident isn't what happened in the flashback but the fact that she had q flashback.
“I don’t judge a book by i’s cover”
“The Incredibles 2 looks mediocre”
ok?
Well, to be fair he doesn't say The Incredibles 2 looks mediocre, rather that he *knows that it is going to be a passive uninteresting experience which achieves nothing new*
Wait was I trying to defend him? Huh. I guess not.
Hitsu he *knows*
It was ok. Nowhere near as bad as people have made it out to be......
One of the disappointing sequels ever
Ikr. Secret Life of Pets 2 was a better sequel.
I feel like Coco and Inside Out are just as creative as the original films, especially Coco. You just don’t see them through the same rose colored glasses as you did the ones from your childhood
Charles Thrush he has his nostalgia glasses on
"This film is for little babies"
Yea, he has massive glasses
Scott Forrester he’s a lot like Anton Ego from Ratatouille when you really think about it
Inside out is kinda bad tho
@@Thecatdrums3 Depending on what you want, but in all honesty IO may not be THE GREATEST but it certainly aint bad
Haven’t seen Coco yet but I gotta say I saw inside out in the cinema and while it got me emotional at the time, looking back at it - I never had the urge to see it again. And I think that makes a big difference. Kudos to everyone who can enjoy Inside out. I just never got invested in the characters.
I agreed with just about 90% of this video, and even as someone that loves Inside Out, I understand the Inside Out criticism but man, you dug way too hard into Coco, and for the first time in one of your videos you were completely hypocritical
Nearly all of the issues you pointed out in Coco are present throughout the rest of Pixar’s library (such as Coco retreading a familiar story structure) and the rest were just nitpicking to such an unholy degree it came back around to being genuinely impressive
And, as many have pointed out, you failed to bring up the great things that both Inside Out and Coco did, passing over them to further drive in the completely backwards and click-bait-y idea that “pIXaR Is DyINg”
I love the first 10 or so Pixar films, but at least I’m able to take off my nostalgia glasses and see that they had flaws just like these new ones do
I’ll take a dozen Coco’s and Inside Out’s over another sequel...or the Good Dinosaur
You’ve officially lived up to your name, old friend
I dunno... A Bug's Life was far from what I would call original. It's a standard Liar Reveal Story. Sure they may have pushed the limitations of how many models can be rendered on one screen, but that doesn't make a good story. It was a story for kids. More simple and basic than Inside Out or Coco. Hell A Bug's Life wasn't even original. They were seriously trying to release a film about ants quicker then the developers of Antz.
Agree with you on everything until your last two sentences -- Antz was the rip off of Pixar, not the other way around. Yes, I'm aware Antz came out first, but that's because people "defected" from Pixar in the production of A Bug's Life and told Dreamworks what sort of movie they should quickly churn out to steal Pixar's thunder, and it totally, totally worked.
*SHREK*
MY EARS
A+ for enthusiasm
Perpetual Peter ?
Amazing how well the CGI holds up in the original Toy Story.
Not on the humans or that dog tho. Rewatched it a year or so ago and that dog was so terrible hha (Sid's pitbull I'm talking about).
Nah it looks like shit, compare it to the fourth film’s animation
I remember a scene in that movie where they argue underneath a truck where a huge chunk of that truck is just a poorly textured unrendered flat rectangle. So no, we've definitely come a loooong way
Derpy Duck Animation The Toys and stuff still look amazing
@Brendan Fitzpatrick No it doesn’t, the toys moving around and the settings still look amazing, doesn’t look bad
A lot of people have already said it, but I think you ripped into Coco and Inside Out on nostalgia and you didn't give them props for the things that they did extremely well. You also don't understand the kind of grudges Mexican families can hold friend, especially when a family member was the one that wronged them. Coco was very emotionally resonant and also a very well made film, and in my opinion easily stands with Incredibles, Up and Wall-E. If you look back at older Pixar films... A lot of those are also mainly just good, and nothing truly spectacular, with the select few from that era being; Incredibles, Up, Wall-E and Ratatouille.
Don't get me wrong, this was a great video and you spoke your opinion clearly and concisely, however I still think you're looking at early Pixar with rose tinted glasses.
EFX616 grudges of Mexican families? No Mexican family acts like how they do in coco, why is it just Mexican families, how come it isn't other families. I live in a Mexican family and they don't hold grudges like that at all.
I know a Mexican family that dont hold grudges; but that doesnt mean that other's dont. I have read stuff online about it, just a quick Google search should help you.
The imbecile literally said that Coco was only about his family not wanting him to be a musician.
I know Americans, who are not school shooters; but that doesn't mean that other's don't. I have read stuff online about it, just a quick Google search should help you. (To Kyle)
Hispanics in general tend to highly favor a united family unit so someone leaving is usually a big cause of drama. They did overdo it tho like damn
Story of OJ playing behind the history of Pixar is an .....Interesting choice
I think this dude is having a "My generation had better movies than you." complex lol.
I've grown up on Pixar, by far Toy Story was my favorite as a child but to say A Bug's Life is better than Coco? I don't think I've ever met someone who said A Bug's Life is their favorite movie lol. Also to write off Coco as "bland story telling/predicable" is lazy in itself. There was so much culture and complex story telling within Coco with Family vs Fame and to write it off as "selfish brown boy wants to play music" is appalling.
A Turtle Tell me he didn’t actually phrase it as “selfish brown boy wants to play music.”
Coco was phrased as the "Family wants me to do something practical but I want to be an artist!" type story.
A bugs life was a horrible movie
@@PinClockFuntime Which is what it is.
A Turtle he’s right tho
If it wasn’t for the scene by the lake, Monsters University would have no value to me.
The Good Dinosaur and Finding Dory feel so bland to me that I haven’t seen them more than once.
A bugs life really isn't that great either.
One of my favs
Yeah the problem was in the main characters. Flick or Flit (idk the main ant) was just so boring. Same with princess Atta. Being a ‘nerd’ and a ‘nag’ we’re the only traits they had. Plus Hopper was generic. The circus friends were much better. If they’d followed the original story wheee the grasshopper is lazy and the ants work hard maybe it would’ve been more nuanced.
On that note I’m pretty sure most Pixar films would work out better if they were shorts. Think of all the bad/ok Pixar films and imagine them as no-dialogue, music filled shorts.
Out of Pixar's first 6 films, I always saw A Bug's Life as the weakest out of the bunch.
Didn't really keep me interested compared to the rest.
I liked antz better
I can't remember the names of any of the main characters and I watched it twice
I believe you're experiencing the nostalgia effect. The "my childhood was the best" effect. Coco and Inside Out hold up just as well as those older films. All of these movies are aimed at kids and they all have plot holes
Why don't the human adults in monsters inc remember the monsters?
Why do the toys feel the need to hide their sentience? How have the humans never found out?
Why did the toys scare Sid instead of trying to change him for the better?
Why did the dentist keep giving his niece fish if he knew she was going to kill them?
There's always SOME holes. But it's an animated movie you're not supposed to think about those things
yeah inside out was good. i wouldnt watch it again but when i saw it in theatres it was really strong
Actually Johns absence and Pixar’s push to make more sequels drastically affected the quality of their films, so Coco and Inside Out had less effort put into them and were trying way to hard to pander to children
i really get a feeling that most people who don‘t get why we don‘t like the new movies as much haven‘t watched the old pixar/disney stuff. it‘s not just nostalgia
@@FrankHunes I grew up in that generation I've seen them all. It's like when people try to argue the old Space Jam was a lot better than the new one. Space Jam was a terrible movie but we were kids when we saw it
I remember when Up came out and it was considered the worst Pixar movie where "only the first 10 minites are good. The bird and the dog are annoying. Plot holes about how the villain should be dead. Pixar is dead". Or how Wall-E was boring with a shitty second half.
This video will look exactly like those comments in the next 10 years. Honestly, defending something mediocre like A Bug's Life and going against movies like Inside Out and Coco is not good. Every new Pixar movie will become "The worst Pixar movie", but in 10 years time it will suddenly become their best
Kiuraz A Bugs Life was a cute movie, cool concept, with a detailed world and memorable characters. I could name each character in the movie, and I've only seen it about 4 times (first time in 1998 when I was 5). He made a good point about the lack of new memorable characters in stuff like Inside Out and Monsters University. I can't even remember the new characters in the Incredibles 2, and I just saw that movie, and kinda liked it. I only remember the ones they created years ago in the first one.
Amen to this.
Peter Kaminsky I can't remember any of them.
I agree that Up and Wall-E are overrated but I think the point of the video is that those early Pixar movies took risks and tried new things in a way the newer ones don't. That's still true of those two movies, even if I didn't love them they were not retreads of tired ideas or something a million other movies already did.
Kiuraz f you up was all good so was wall e but I do agree with your second half of the comment
So the copy pasting of ants is impressive compared to Coco a love letter to the day of the dead and Mexican culture. Inside Out makes sense when you understand that every character has the mental age of a child who has very simple emotions. Also it showed the importance of sadness. Joy wouldn't let Riely be sad which almost caused bad mental damage.
Ok, you’re letting nostalgia corrupt your opinion. They still stand by their old mottos of making a new break in the CG animation world. In Coco it was the fact that every chord struck in the movie is accurate to the guitar. The new movies have good, if not great stories. But, they’re “missing something”. They’re missing you either being 5-12 years old, or have a ridiculous amount of nostalgia for old movies.
whilst lighting, sound, and textures have significantly improved in the newer Pixar films, the writing has definitely gone down in quality significantly.
"They’re missing you either being 5-12 years old" LMAO what kind of shitty argument is that? Pixar used to make great movies suitable for kids and adults.. now they dont. Simple as that. Suck up the criticism and open your eyes. Your fanboyism is getting to your head.
No. While I agree that Coco and Inside Out are just as good as Bugs Life, Cars, Ratatouie, Incredibles, Toy Story 1 and 2 and Monsters Inc they are missing the thing that makes Finding Nemo, Up and Walle absolute masterpeices. Some of the others are deffinetly masterpeices but not like these 3. I can't really put my finger on what it is but those 3 movies go beyond Pixar making great films that are just as important to adults as they are to children.. they are almost kubrickian in nature.
"In Coco it was the fact that every chord struck in the movie is accurate to the guitar" Is that something special? Why? It isn't, that's just an excuse, the story telling was nothing special.
@God of Light, the writing has definitely *not* gone down significantly. You can't tell me that a Bug's Life or Monster's Inc is better written than Coco.
Is DikPix dead?
He's not,but he's brain dead
I don't know if that comment was about me but mine wasn't an insult.
juan Sanchez DikPix is his second channel, not another person.
LOL
*takes picture*
Nope, still looks Strong and Healthy to me
12:03 right when he says there's no monstrous quality, we see monster teeth on the school.
I was thinking the exact same thing.
I'm going to be honest, I noticed that too.
Couldn't help but hear all the great hip hop beats in the background
I see what he did. Dory has bad memory, and he has the instrumentals to Forgot About Dre while talking about finding Dory.
I'm sorry, I find your dress-down of Coco ridiculous. It explores the themes of memory and connection to family so well it made me cry even after three viewings. It has the strongest pathos of any Pixar film to date for both me and many people I know. You missed the point entirely in pursuit of a clickbait video title.
He's right when he's saying that the story is bland and that the characters are written with 1 trait. Miguel is a child, he likes music, and that's literally EVERYTHING. Yeah i guess everything is subjective but there are lots of downsides in recent pixar that you can't ignore if you want to have an analytic approach.
his love for music in that shitty environment causes more conflict in someone that could fill a life time let alone one movie. just because you cant feel an ounce of empathy doesnt make it a shit movie lol.
"Me react with emotion, therefore thing can't be criticized"
Yeah coco was great
I thought the plot was rather predictable and I agree the characters weren't as well defined as in some other movies, however I think the topics that were explored were unusual and interesting and the emotional aspect should have been mentioned. The part where he sang with his great grandma brought out tears.. And by tears I mean bawling... so it did at least something well.
"Like I said they are competent!" YES! "And build for little little babies!" NEVER HAS MY OPINION OF SOMEONE DID A 180 SO QUICKLY!
I actually loved cars, I see your point about how did they get pictures up and I suppose they could have focused on a more car focused world, but to me it was still a really good film.
Yeah, I don't get the hate for Cars. I thought Cars and Cars 3 were excellent movies. Even Cars 2 can be enjoyable, if you think of it as a spin-off rather than an actual entry and think of Cars 3 as being the proper Cars 2.
@@VGamingJunkieVT THIS! I loved cars and I actually quite enjoyed Cars 2. Cars 3 was a great homage to the fans of the first film. I really don't get the hate for these films.
Exactly what I was thinking!
Cars two is kinda weird though, if you didn’t watch the first then watched the second you would be extremely confused with what cars is, you would think cars is a crappy spy movie but with cars.
Sorry to get off topic but I don't get the hate for Brave? It's the only Pixar film I haven't seen and people are calling it trash and saying it shouldn't have one an Oscar. I don't get why? It was the first Pixar movie to feature a female protagonist who is a princess and even though I love wreck it Ralph and I actually saw it I just don't know what to say. Does that mean if I see Brave I'm trash?
Pixar= one of the greatest things childhood brought me. Much respect 💪🏾
NO. Lion King ripped off Kimba The White Lion.
You do realize how much the script borrows off of Hamlet right?
@Helena Niceswanger You do realize that many people do believe the Lion King ripped off Kimba right?
@@thejedisonic67 It can rip off both...
I almost stopped watching at "I know Incredibles 2 will suck, even though I haven't seen it" because of just how wrong and pretentious that statement was, but overall you make some strong points (even if I do think you give too much credit to the old and too little to the new).
And he was right. Incredibles 2 was terrible.
Well...yeah, Incredibles 2 was...okay, but, nothing great, I'd watch the original Incredibles over the sequel any day, the sequel was pretty disappointing.
Lmao was he wrong?
Moonatik i think he got over hes head on that statement, saying itll be bad without seeing it. BUT he wasnt entirely wrong, the incredibles 2 had some flaws
He wasn’t wrong, IMO
I'm so sorry, but honestly, while the first half of the video seems perfectly on track, mentioning and listing Pixar's growth both in storytelling as well as fighting to gain its creative independence and breaking technical barriers; the second half feels rather snobby. Cause let's be honest here, if you put the SAME scrutiny you're putting upon films like Coco and Inside Out, really none of their other films will hold up (as you mention). Coco is, by far, one of Pixar's most compelling and visually complex films of all. It's like you're not even aware that putting millions of multicolour light bulbs, as well as clothes and facial expressions to moving skeletons, has been (in words of Pixar's design team) one of their hardest tasks ever, yeah, even harder than putting 430 animated ants in a single frame. They did have to redevelop their animating software and animated techniques in order for a movie like Coco to be technically possible. And that's just the technical part, for you're also entirely overlooking the deeper aspects of the film, such as bringing in an easy/understandable way a really complex cultural tradition to millions of people around the world; one that treats a topic that no many animation studios would be willing to treat so easily, such as death itself.
To say the movie "Is for little babies" is just insulting. NitPix seriously needs to work on his scripts.
Well, i agree that Coco was simply beautiful. Definitely a technical achievement. The surface textures and atmospheric lighting was breath-taking.
But NitPix has a point in regards to the overarching conflict in Coco's story. I really loved the look and feel of that movie, but the story is reminiscent of Brave. In that character archs are rather flat and the story doesn't really push any nuanced themes. I agree with NitPix that a deeper look at the importance of family or what music can do with instilling memories and cultural vibrancy could have been taken.
Inside Out was a lot of fun, and Joy's character arch is rich and meaningful. Yes, there is an excruciating amount of telling and not showing in the movie, but i'm more willing to suffer that for a meaningful character arch like where Joy's wants (to keep Riley just as happy as when she was a child) changes to adopt what she really needs (to understand that life is complex and through empathy, Riley can achieve happiness from without and within).
I wish I could take back finding out about coco, that's the kind of trash I'd expect to come from mexico's bollywood if they could make pixar films. You want to talk about cultural appropriation? That's it. At least the dusk till dawn and mariachi franchises were fun and good, and unique when they released. I hate when studios borrow other cultures without knowing the in and outs, but pretending to, and then don't even make a good film. An example of this from Disney, Pocahontas, it might have inaccuracies or be offensive in some ways, but it called out both sides on their wrongs, and was objectively a good film. Hunchback would also apply.
J Dee Carter gets it. Coco is TRASH, and there are DOZENS of technically more impressive films that came out before coco, and did more, with less. These comments are full of retards who think they know shit about films and animation but don't so i'll just drop 1 example, Avatar. FYI, with each passing year, it gets easier and easier to do what used to cost millions. TH-camrs can make videos of better quality than The Matrix now, for hundreds of dollars, while it cost millions to do half what you can do now for under a thousand dollars back in early 2000.
I think the "telling, not showing" really works for that movie though, because the whole point is that these parts of her brain are the ones actually thinking for her, so they kinda *need* to say it to the audience. They still often mix it in with the girl showing emotion, or what-have-you, so IMO, it all just kinda makes sense. If they were to just "show" it, nobody would understand what was really happening -- though like I said, they did some showing *and* telling, so it wasn't too bad to begin with. Nitpix thinks that was bad, and I whole-heartedly disagree. I don't think you could possibly make that movie without some narration. It just wouldn't work at all.
Pretty ironic how you are complaining about pixar getting worse over time and the same happened to your video.
jeeeeeeeeeeeeez
Have some mercy 😂😂😂
hahahhahaha soo true mate, dead on
He is spot on. If you can not see this, then you are not a movie maker and lacking scriptural structuring. Since Disney bought Pixar in 2011 they started, clearly, shifting towards entertaining over forming new experiences. And that is exactly why NitPix is exactly right. And even though COCO was heavier on the new experience part than any of the new ones, it still does not compare to the little details put in WALL-E for example. What did I learn from Coco compared to WALL-E or any of the movies before? Can not be compared. It is in the details. Trying to break new boundaries and teaching NEW concepts. #buyandlarge
@@CharleyBoersen hahahaha "you are not a movie maker" hahahahahhaha you my friend don't undertand this industry clearly
Inside Out and Coco are amazing and sure Monsters University wasn’t as awesome as it should’ve been but it was still a fun film.
BlastOff98 Exactly! What’s wrong with just making an entertaining movie? Even if Pixar’s classic movies are way better than most of the movies from this decade, I think this guy has too high of expectations.
@@BROJANGSTER where "the too high expectations" come from? From the first fifteen years of doing movies. Excellent movies. Everybody's doing "entertaining" and "fun" movies, the mediocre, forgettable films that will still make you buy it. And that sucks. That's the thole point of this video. Of course you are totally OK with it if you are completely satisfied with just fun films.
Nunchaku Surströmming subscribe to Pewdiepie
@@BROJANGSTER Because he is a critic? Its his job to look at movies as more then a bit of time to look at pretty colors, turn off your brain, and eat popcorn.
Coco, Inside Out, and Incredibles Two were all better than Bugs Life. Also the fact that you hold Bugs Life in the same regard as Toy Story and have formed your opinion about Incredibles Two without even seeing it just shows that you're more concerned with criticizing recent Pixar and jacking off old Pixar than giving legitimate criticism. You just kinda brush aside the fact that Cars wasn't great, plus a lot of your critiques of Coco and Inside Out could be applied to early Pixar as well.
Pixar has made some sub par movies and you've given some legitimate criticism of those movies. But the irony of this entire video essay is that you started it off by pointing out how unlikely, almost impossible, it is for a studio to make one great movie after another and yet the thrust of your argument is that Pixar has been making good movies in recent years rather than great movies. So what's your point at the end of the day? That Pixar can't do the impossible? They're still making good movies that are better than most of what's coming out other studios so I don't think it's fair to say that they're dead, dying, or even close to dying.
Isaac Shur Tbh, I like "the Good Dinosaur" more than "a Bug's Life" because it, too, pushed the limits on visuals and had characters that just shut up and let the story happen.
He's blinded by nostalgia
you are wrong
He spoke about Incredibles 2 for like 2 minutes
Steven Keane wow bro! Sick burn! #roasted #lol. Totally awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bugs Life over coco?what drugs are you on.
@@analicious94 That's very rude.
fluffo you’re an idiot
@@BROJANGSTER say the one who put their terrible face on icon and played Fortnite
@@analicious94 well... she did by the end of the movie so...
Osman Oglu Yeah that’s right. Bug’s Life had the very complex “Hero wants to be an inventor, society doesn’t want him to be an inventor, conflict, resolution, end.”
See? It’s easy to make something sound less than it is by simplifying it.