•
Rating: I promised you, and so here it is: Pixar films, from the least beautiful to the most beautiful. In this first part of two, there will be the bad/mediocre/good films (after all, there's only one bad one). But now I've made you wait long enough (just 6 months), let's delve into these films:
LAST PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6QZCU9rTiw
It's absolutely no secret that the least successful film in the entire Pixar production is indeed Cars 2, but in my opinion, few have managed to truly explain why: Pixar is famous not just for pioneering CGI animation but for its always rich and original storytelling that sometimes manages to outdo many other films; even those that are not stellar still have significant thematic and narrative richness that makes them worthy of praise, even if they aren't brilliant. Cars 2 is absolutely not the case: the story of this film leaves you with absolutely nothing, the espionage thread is introduced lazily, the characters have practically no personality except for Mater, who is made the absolute protagonist. The entire subplot of this eco-friendly fuel is uninteresting, especially for a child audience to which this film is targeted. In fact, another reason Cars 2 doesn't work narratively is because the main pillars of the plot, namely the entire subplot of the eco-friendly fuel and the revenge of the rusty cars, are elements a child cannot understand, but a teenager/adult can. This choice could have been made to involve adults as well through a more complex plot, but even the adults cannot follow the narration well due to totally flat characters and overly childish humor. Cars 2 is one wrong storytelling choice after another, presenting an uninteresting story for both young and old, with plot twists that are decidedly predictable if not downright illogical. The film is saved by Pixar's typical technical mastery and John Lasseter's consistently excellent direction, which offers some moments that, detached from the film, are very beautiful. If you've seen the first Cars, skip straight to the third.
23RD PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI7L4VNcOmE
It really hurts to put this film only above Cars 2 because it had so much to offer... but The Good Dinosaur is not exactly a good film. Obviously, there's a nice big gap between Cars 2 and this one, but even in this case, the story is not perfect. Unlike Cars 2, it's not because it's fundamentally wrong, but due to the decidedly confusing development and certain elements that forcibly advance the plot that this potentially excellent story gets wasted. The characters are a bit "hit or miss": Arlo can be annoying at times but is not a bad character or protagonist, Spot the little human is not very interesting at first but gradually gains more importance and depth, the T-Rexes are nice characters who, in the campfire scene, manage to convey one of the main themes of the film, namely facing one's fears so as not to fall victim to them. The animation is perhaps at Pixar's pinnacle: the settings are crafted to perfection to the point where it doesn't even seem like animation, but there's an issue with the animation of the dinosaurs, which isn't necessarily bad, but the overly childish character design ruins it a bit. But, as I've already said, the main problem is the story: it doesn't exist. It's simply Arlo ending up far from his home, a series of disconnected events that make Arlo more mature, Arlo returning home, the end. I could say many things about Cars 2, but not that its story wasn't a story. The story of The Good Dinosaur is not a story; it's barely the outline of a story, but I can understand why it turned out that way: this film indeed had a very troubled production, undergoing many changes even on a directorial level, the film's creator Bob Peterson abandoned the film leaving only Peter Sohn in charge, and I feel sorry for him because he also faced some hating due to this film when in fact it wasn't his fault. I hope he can redeem himself in the future and hope he isn't remembered only for this misstep for all of Pixar.
22ND PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWY_KtLbxkA
Similarly, Brave, like Arlo, had its production problems: the idea came from Brenda Chapman, who was one of the directors for The Prince of Egypt, who at some point during production was fired and replaced by Mark Andrews who, frankly, had no idea what this film was (in an interview, he actually said, "Gender has nothing to do with this movie"...okay Mark, if you say so). And indeed, the final result is not exactly great, but it is still better than Cars 2 and The Good Dinosaur due to its interesting idea and good, not so predictable story (which is not always synonymous with good, as in the case of the "bearish" twist the film takes). As a protagonist, Merida may be uninteresting and often does things illogically and the villain is not at all characterized, but the rest of the characters are good: Merida's father and mother have a beautiful dynamic between them and their daughter, the suitors for Merida's hand and their fathers are memorable in their way, not good or deep, but at least you remember them. Even the old witch is not so interesting as a character, but at least you remember them. It's a bit like the film itself: it's not exactly a good film, but at least you remember it. Then there's also the factor of animation, here truly impeccable. In short, a fairly decent film with some excellent elements.
21ST PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC5oGaGwv9w
For me, Cars is a rather frustrating film. Not because of the story, which is good in its way, nor because of the characters, not so well-characterized but still okay, but because of its worldbuilding: the world of Cars is a continuous series of automotive quotations that placed in a world like ours makes this universe created by John Lasseter unclear on how it functions. I take another animated film, Robots, made by Bluesky Studios: in that film, it is explained in a very clever way how robots are born, what and how they eat and drink, etc. Cars does not do this, and consequently, the viewer like me will wonder how cars are born, if they feed through the mouth or tank, how they age and die, and so on. It's frustrating for me because I'm always very interested in knowing how an imaginary world like that of Cars works. Besides this, the film is okay: a cute story that oscillates between moments that are pure filler (which, let's face it, could easily have been cut from the almost 2-hour film) to excellent moments like the entire back story of Doc, the accident at the end, or the flashback with "Our Town" in the background. These moments do elevate the film, which remains just a good viewing, nothing more, nothing less.
20TH PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhlPAj38rHc
Cars 3 is Rocky 4 that didn't feel like it, say it bluntly. However, the film is good and in its way an improvement over the first chapter. For once, Lightning McQueen is not relegated to being "the only character with sensible development during the story"; we also have the aspiring racer Cruz Ramirez (if you ask me, definitely more interesting than the protagonist). The story always has its filler moments and truly excellent ones, but this time compared to the first, there’s more "pathos", more vitality in the story that focuses even more on Doc and how he can be a reference point for Lightning to become a reference point for Cruz. The animation is obviously always at a high level; for the rest, I don't have much else to say, it has the usual pros and cons of Cars. Watch it because it's the true sequel to Cars.
19TH PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWOsRF_8I58
Toy Story 4 is the weakest among all the Toy Story films. I have never understood why people, even after its release, consider it an unnecessary film; this film has something to say and fits well among its predecessors, even contradicting them, which is not always possible. The story this time centers entirely on Woody, on how he no longer receives attention (by the way, did the little girl forget the promise she made to Andy to "take care of Woody"? You had just one job.) but still tries to do everything possible for his little owner, including looking after a toy she made that constantly tries to throw itself away because it's made from trash, only to, after a series of events and encounters with new and old characters, abandon everyone and live a new life. However, this story is made to rise and fall rapidly by the characters: among the new characters, there are the duck and the bunny, very funny with a truly brilliant gag in the film, the motorcyclist dubbed in Italian by Corrado Guzzanti is nice and performs well, Boo Beep has an interesting new background, but above all, Gappy Gappy is perhaps the best villain ever to come out of Pixar, her inner conflict over how despite her efforts, she isn't accepted by a child is pure thematic genius as it aligns perfectly with Woody's storyline, even going in different directions. But in the film, there are also the old characters, and here we come to the sad point of the film: the old characters have no role in the film, they no longer have a personality, Mr. Potato, Rex, Slinky, are in the film just because they are there; if you remove them, the film remains the same, and this is very serious for a saga like Toy Story. But none of them has had the same treatment that Buzz Lightyear received...I know he's always been a comical side character, but the films gave you a reason for him being like that, but the inner voice thing: 1, comes almost out of nowhere, 2, isn't funny, in fact, it's painful watching Buzz act like an idiot without a real reason. Toy Story 4 could easily have been among the best of Pixar; it has the right ingredients, but this element (fundamental in its predecessors) drags it down heavily.
18TH PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itRlqaIRYjU
The last Pixar movie I went to see in cinemas, Finding Dory is a good sequel/spin-off of its predecessor. Yes, the plot is a bit derivative of other better-executed Pixar films, like Finding Nemo (go figure!) or Toy Story 3, but still, it's of good quality. The characters are likable, but not as memorable as they were in its predecessor (except for Hank the octopus, of course). The animation, of course, is perfect. And... that's everything; I don't have much to say about this film, it's overall a good film with some excellent features (like the shell scene... this is Pixar!), and that's it, it's not like Toy Story 4 or the next one on the list that could have been excellent but are dragged down. It's a good film overall, let's move on.
17TH PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjq3CgiHF-0
Monsters University, let's be honest, is for 2/3 a mediocre film: it's the classic story of the underdog character (good old Mike Wazowski) trying every way to prove himself and show that he is worth something despite everything, and this element is framed by a story that's supposed to be fun but is instead slow and somewhat clichéd, especially in the second act, with forgettable characters characterized a bit superficially. So, why isn't it lower? Well, the reason Monsters University isn't at the bottom of the list (it had all the elements to be there) is due to its third act, totally unpredictable and playing with very beautiful and interesting elements and themes: Sullivan tampering with the simulator to make Mike believe he is scary, Mike entering the human world to show he can be scary only to discover he isn't, Sullivan and Mike's heartfelt talk by the lake, the two of them then scaring a group of adults to return to the monster world, Mike and Sully getting expelled and finding a job at Monsters Inc, then gradually climbing the company's ranks. It's a very mature third act that reflects on themes that should always be present in children's films to help them understand that failure is a part of life and that they should always attempt new paths when the ones they want to follow can't be pursued. Pixar has never done something like this and I believe never will again... but, as I already mentioned, there are also the first two acts, which aren't much to behold, and therefore the film ends up being good, absolutely, but it's mainly because of that final act, the rest isn't quite good.
16TH PLACE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID0dV85gJZE
The Incredibles 2 is, overall, the best sequel of the 2010s for Pixar. However, what makes it so isn’t found in the plot or characters, but in the direction: Brad Bird does a remarkable job, creating action scenes that outperform entire action films thanks also to the animation, among the best in Pixar's entire filmography. The rest of the film is a bit hit or miss; there are very nice things and others that could be avoided: the villain could easily surpass Syndrome if not for their motivations, which are definitely illogical, new characters are cute but not memorable, the old ones have remained the same (except for Jack Jack, who shines in this film, especially in the raccoon scene). The plot picks up some of the elements of the previous film but adapts and reshapes them to create something slightly different. In the end, however, The Incredibles 2 remains an excellent aesthetic film and definitely a great sequel, but as a standalone film, it is "only" good.
End of the first part, I don't know when the second will come
Loading comments slowly
