Why is Illumination so successful while Pixar films are flopping?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Why is Illumination so successful while Pixar films are flopping?
Why is Illumination so successful while Pixar films are flopping?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I genuinely don't know how their movies make so much money.
They always range from trash to mediocre.
Sing was good
Idiots
Illumination is garbage but they still appeal to kids, and parents think they're inoffensively cute. Pixar instead has been trying to cater to childless 20-30 somethings, who don't actually watch much animation comparatively.
They make movies for kids, a massive market. Disney makes movies for twitter, a tiny market
I'm almost certain illumination does a shit ton of market research/testing to ensure their products are as safe and appealing as possible.
That and they are unironic masters at advertising even back to the first despicable me. They spare no cent.
They got people to watch sing based off of a minute long audition scene that was 1% of the movie... then did it again for the sequel.
They saw how much people liked the "interview" trailers for the incredible and ensured they could get the same energy in their trailers
Illumination also know very well how to cut expenses on the production. A smaller budget means a bigger margin of profit.
say what you want about them, but at the end of the day they still do what theyre supposed to- entertain children and families.
People are over pixar's current schtick of relying on gimmicks to carry a feature-length film. especially when those gimmicks nowadays are milquetoast social commentary more often than not.
What do you think kids and subsequently their parents are going to prefer?
The funny singing animal movie, or the movie about a thinly veiled racism allegory?
I think it's because they often heavily advertise their movies making most youngsters to drag their elders in to seeing them along with them actually being funny for once and most of their characters (notably the Minions) relying on visual humour like slapstick and not speaking, which can easily pass language barriers without hassle
pandering to the lowest common denominator
This. The Michael Bay Transformers of animated movies.
>Make movies for cheap
>Appeal to the common audience with safe plots
>Character designs are simplistic or just formulaic anthro
>Budget more inflated than the girls on Andrew Dobson's hard drive
>"Here's the story about how these sentient blueberries represent my experiences growing up with my grandfather in a Japanese interment camp during September 19 1942 and how he didn't approve of my decisionorino to go to California to study flamingo sexology"
>"Also those sentient blueberries have big noses."
Gee... wonder why.
Illumination also appeals to actual children
So does a good Pixar movie.
And the bad ones too if you count the Cars series.
WRONG
Pixar appeals to parents first
Pixar appealed to kids. They then added an extra layer by using the kid-friendly premise in order to make movies for adults (Brad Bird was especially great with this). It didn't "appeal to parents." I hate using this because it turned into a cliche, but it appealed to everyone. Kids were attracted to goofy pictures of a silly green astronaut and cowboy, a funny dog and old man, or a fat dude trying to put on a tight superhero costume to Eye of the Tiger, and adults got something to actually pay attention to with a plot that respected their time.
Cars 2 was shit.
And I hate it for all the unnecessary death, while most hate it, not because it's not about McQueen, but because it's about Mater.
>I hate it for all the unnecessary death
Sounds like a (You) problem.
>Sounds like a (You) problem.
It kinda is, since I never really respected series' that don't respect death, but it ties into the tonal dissonance in what I'm talking about.
In the Incredibles, there's a scene where Helen looks at her children and tells them that the bad guys will try to kill them. There's no sugarcoating it. There's no goofy antics. So, while the kids are off causing a bunch of nameless mooks to die, there's always that undertone of tension that there's (in-universe) real people whose lives are being ended. It heightens the drama, and adds a little bit of tragedy into Syndrome's plans through a very serious moment.
In Cars 2, there's none of that. Cars just explode left-and-right and nobody thinks anything wiser of it. It makes the entire stakes warranted on familiarity. I don't give a crap about Mater or any of the spy shit because I value any of them, I 'care' (strong word there) because he was a comic relief in the first movie. If it was somebody else, like that spy from the beginning, I wouldn't think two seconds about their stakes, making the action scenes just visual noise.
And if it sounds like I'm over-analyzing that, I'm really not. That's the kind of thing that goes into engaging an adult into movies. It's a long-winded way to say that if you're going to introduce life-or-death stakes, then you need to respect your audience, otherwise you should just leave them out, kinda like something similar to Ratatouille, where, despite mentions of death, the closest we get to a life-or-death situation is Remi being drowned, making the rest of the more mundane drama more impactful and engaging.
Ever heard of "don't ask for whom the bell tolls"?
In the metaphor, Cars has no bells, only peel-outs, not to celebrate the living, but handwave from the tragedy.
You make no sense.
I may be drunk, andalso moronic, but that does NOT mean that Cars 2 is a tonal mess.
To put it another way, and this is a problem I have with a lot of action movies, if the people in-universe don't care about death, why should I, a 4th-dimensional being to them, care?
No need to pretend the first Cars is bad just because the sequels are.
Cars 2 is okay. People hate it for not being about McQueen but it's a nice action-comedy. The third movie has plenty of good moments too, it's just that one character that ruins it.
No, Cars 2 is genuinely bad.
Half of this, the first one was good, and 3 was good as well. Cars 2 was the only bad one, play the Cars video game instead.
Their movies are inoffensive, marketed to the right people, and relatively cheap to make. It's hard for them to NOT be profitable.
Illumination has perfected the process of appealing to kids solely for money
Illumination does not pretend it's anything but dumb fun and low brow entertainment. Pixar was good because it always held itself to a higher standard but as its premises and characters become more and more generic, their standards just hold them back with nothing to provoke an audience reaction at all.
Only despicable me and the recent mario movie are massive hits, secret life of pets and sing are profitable because they are cheap to make but both sequels did it worst
>Only despicable me
and its sequels/spinoffs
There's never been one good Illumination movie
See
.
Illumination know how to make films appeal to kids and to look just about interesting enough for adults to watch them.
>Goyslop vs Woke goyslop
Take a guess
My kids like Sing but I find it boring at parts. The monkeys I'm Still Standing is better than Elton John's version. Sing 2 is terrible.
I felt that 2 was just a rehash of 1 on a larger stage. Buster is still the focus of a repeat on The Liar Revealed plot and manages to get everything he wants a second time.
>than Black Wannabe Spiderman Miles
That's Sony, not Pixar
lol wtf this thread is gutted.
Do not reply to this post, I'm just laughing @
>Thing above standard back then be not good nowadays
HOLY SHIT RLY
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny
You're either an ignorant idiot or a pretty good troll.
The characters are what make the movie good, not the fact that they are cars.
Nana has "frick you" money that made all of that go away, moron.
2 made this get really fricking weird, they started bringing lawyers and copyright laws into the mix which just makes you question why the frick Buster isn't in prison even more.