Take My Breath Away

I’m sure many of us animation fans have had the argument with a friend, colleague, family member, whoever, that animation is not a genre, and it is not just for kids. I know I have had moments of endless frustation at explaining this concept to some. Brad Bird threatened in The Incredibles DVD commentary, that if another person asked him what it was like to work in the “animation genre”, he would punch them.

Animation has, it seems, been typecast. In Western countries for the most part. People see fuzzy little animals bounding around on screen, eating carrots, throwing pies, and people see that the film is a good babysitter for their children. And why not, most western animated films and shorts are quite suitable for children. It’s almost the medium’s own fault. They have let themselves be typecast. In Japan, we have amazing films from Studio Ghibli, which most certainly are not really for children. Yet here we have this Western attitude, that animation is for kids.

Some companies are trying to break this mould. Movies like Persepolis (albeit an Israeli film, not a Western one), WALL-E, Ratatouille and particularly, IMHO, The Incredibles. However, I still get the feeling more can be done. I think Pixar should challenge many parents beliefes and ideologies about animation once and for all. Show people really what animation can be. I get the feeling, although they are making more mature films, that they still are trying a little to much to please most audiences. The great British philosopher, Bertrand Russell, once said:

I feel by Pixar making their films for everybody, they don’t have the ability to shine. I want a blockbuster from Pixar*. The Incredibles was halfway there. Brad Bird really shook things up. I want The Lord of the Rings or Gladiator as done by Pixar. But I don’t just want the blockbuster, I also want something with explicit hard hitting messages. Take a Boston Legal episode and have it made by Pixar, or Charlie Wilson’s War and Michael Clayton done by Pixar.

Certainly, if is just people talking, then why not shoot it in film because it’s cheaper and quicker. But Pixar is a hub of genius’ and experts in their field, so I am sure they can brainstorm and come up with someway to do it best. Some way to satisfy that PG-13 Pixar film craving inside me, a film that blows us away with its epicness in much the same way the the MOS sequences in LOTR and The Dark Knight took my breath away.

Pixar are the ones to do this.

• Some may argue that all Pixar films so far are blockbusters, but I mean it in the general sense of the term, i.e when you hear the voice over guy go “In the blockbuster event of the year” in association with really grand, epic, films like LOTR and Spiderman.

I think the reason that animation has been classified as a ‘genre that is suitable for children’ is not only because of the fact that animation, both CGI and traditional, has almost always produced family-friendly films, (particularly in the West, as you mentioned, bawpcwpn) but also because in animation, you can do anything. Want to see a pig flying? Animate it. It’s much easier to do that than to get a real pig and try to record it live-action. And even before animated films existed, the world of fantasy was always associated with children. To be ‘mature’, you have to grow up and stop thinking about those sorts of things (apparently).

So because animation is pretty much limitless, the childhood fantasies of those that always wanted to see their dreams come true were incorporated into animated films. I mean, why bother animating a film that’s mainly a drama or something, and that has no fantastical elements? (A Scanner Darkly is an exception, but even in that case, the animation was very realistic and certain elements of the film meant that the animation was quite appropriate).

Basically, what I’m getting at, is that live action films are doing one sort of thing, and animated films are doing another. Animated films can do what live action films do, but why would you bother if live action films are doing it already? (This is the mindset of those who see animation as a ‘genre’, not my own viewpoint, mind.)

Now here’s where I think Pixar and other respectable animation companies can expand- doing something that is perhaps a 12 rated certificate or even a 15 doesn’t mean that it has to be all serious and talky. Pan’s Labyrinth is a great example of fantasy (created by animation) incorporated into a very adult background. It’s a genuinely scary film at points, yet when I first heard about it, I really thought it was a kid’s film- apparently not!

So, if Pixar are able to create a film that uses animation to its best effect, if they make a film that you couldn’t really create using live-action, but that still involves some adult themes, then they could be onto something. But, by the looks of their schedule, aside from the rumoured John Carter of Mars (which looks like it might be live-action anyway- correct me if I’m wrong), they’re not planning to do anything like that at the moment.

I agree with you on some points, strongly disagree on others.

Though I do agree that animation is being tagged as “kids,” I don’t think the answer is for Pixar to start making adult films. Animation, in my opinion, should be used the way it originally was: For both. Jokes for adults and children. What annoys me are movies that are marketed towards kids with the commercials but then show up with sexual undertones and pop culture jokes throughout the entire movie. That is not the way to adults entertained; only the way to make CGI look bad. WALL-E, Ratatouille, and The Incredibles showed that the best way is to make a good balance.

That brings me to my second point. I’ve seen a lot of people say things along the lines of “Pixar is CGI, therefor, it’s bad.” or “Pixar got all the 2D artists fired.” neither of which, of course, are true. I’m pretty sure the people who claim that Pixar is CGI crap don’t actually see the movies. They just assume that since it uses the same techniques as say, Shrek, it’s at the same level. Well, that’s like saying Family Guy is the same level as Beauty and the Beast. 'Cause they’re both 2D, see? They must be at the same level!

Pixar, contrary to popular belief, reaches the formula for those Disney classics. Good story, complex but humorous characters, beautiful animation, and CLASSY jokes for adults and kids. What we need is for Disney and Dreamworks to do this, not send one of the few companies that know what their doing into an adult rut. Many parents would hesitate bringing their kids to Pixar movies if Pixar made very adult films. When I was a kid, my dad wouldn’t let me see Elf because of Will Ferril, The Nightmare Before Christmas because of Tim Burton, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory because of Johnny Depp and Tim Burton (yes I know he’s a crazy conservative. Now you know where I got it from). It’s stupid for parents to judge the movies by who made them or acted in them, but they do. And sometimes, they’re right. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was kinda creepy, even when I finally got the chance to see it, and it might have freaked me out as a kid. It’s not a good idea to give Pixar an adult reputation because other companies won’t wise up.

I don’t think that PIXAR should make their movies with anyone specifically in mind. I have heard this said several times: that they want to make the movies that they would want to see - and so they should. It is this formula that works so well, and the movies that come out depend very much on the director, considering that PIXAR is a very director driven studio.

No studio should start making adult films just to prove a point, nor make a completely kid-friendly film just because they are told that’s what people expect. They make the movie, and then parents can decide whether it is appropriate or not for their children.

If you search “Animation is not a genre” on Google, you will see that many, many people agree with this viewpoint - although the majority of them are either into films, or making them.

Yes, animation is considered a genre, but I don’t think that by changing the way a bunch of companies are making movies is going to necessarily change this. If you honestly believed that watercolours were of a different genre from acrylics, if I switched from watercolour landscapes to abstracts, would it change your perception of watercolours being the genre, rather then the medium? Probably not. In fact, I think that if an amazing adult animated movie was made, there may very well be the reaction of quotes like this: “This movie is a masterpiece, showing the animated genre at it’s finest!”

Again, genre. People do categorize, and rightfully so. There is some sense in comparing animated films, in the sense that you are comparing how various artists utilize their medium of choice. It’s like when you look at paintings. You can compare two acrylic paintings, and like one better over the other, but you can just as easily compare them with those painted with watercolours.

The one thing that gets me though, is that quite often, when this category comes up, several animation companies are mentioned and compared. Namely, Pixar and DreamWorks. I like both of their films, albeit differently. I can enjoy two films, even if I know which one of the two is technically better. I try to keep an open mind with everything that I see, because even if we become biased towards an amazing company, it’s still a bias that can cause us to shun other studios. This goes against, in my mind, the fact that animation is a medium - not a genre.

I wasn’t suggesting that Pixar soley make films aimed at adults. I wasn’t suggesting that they should make for a single audience either.

I was thinking however, that as Pixar make movies that they want to see, that surely someone in Pixar wants to see something that isn’t G-Rated or PG-Rated. Take Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. Now I wouldn’t say that either are kids films (especially considering Potter’s dark content), but nor would I say they are adults films. They are films for the general population of all ages depending on the mental maturity of the person. You can have a film for all audiences without making it G or PG.

Who (other than the Disney accountants) cares if all those conservative parents don’t take their kiddies to see a Pixar movie who have been known for so long as the ones that make movies for little kiddies up to adults. Oh the shock and horror! They didn’t make one for the kiddies! My child will be scarred for life. HOW DARE PIXAR! Then all the name calling at Pixar would start about how Pixar always made family friendly films and to make something like this! But they are only the vocal minority. Everyone else will be clicking their heels in glee (At least, I know I would be). The money isn’t all from Box Office these days, thus why we have home video and merchandise. Once those kiddies become old enough, well they can buy it on Blu-Ray or whatever the going format is at the time.

Pixar mixed things up with The Incredibles and hiring Brad Bird and letting him making a PG film. Maybe they could mix things up again by doing this.

I agree with you that Pixar could definetly explore its potential if they break from the G and PG ratings. Pixar makes great movies. They are successful not because of their animation, but their story. So why can’t Pixar take on story material that might be considered too strong for a PG move? Well parents might be surprised that Pixar is breaking from their “aimed for 'all-ages” boundary. But I am sure PIxar can create a blockbuster. They do have the talent, and the potential to.

I’m going to have to agree with you bawpcwpn, that animation is usually seen as being synonymous with a kids film. But I think this will change. The popularity of Pixar films, TV shows like The Simpsons, South Park and Family Guy, as well as anime has brought awareness to the general public that animation is only a medium that can be used to tell many stories, and to many diverse audiences (themes, maturity levels). Parents who don’t have much of an interest in cinema, well, they may be a bit slow to grasp the concept of animation being a medium, not a genre. But sometimes you can’t please everyone. If people don’t want to be educated, they won’t be. Teenagers today understand moreso that cartoons can be for everyone, but we still have a long way to go, and it will all come in due time.

From even before Pixar released Toy Story, I think one of their main, long-term goals was to create an adult Pixar film. Even though all Pixar films can be enjoyed by everyone, if you think about the themes from Toy Story, then compare it to the depth of films like Finding Nemo, The Incredibles and WALL•E, you’ll see that they were gradually pushing their little box of what they would have been allowed to do with a “cartoon”. They have to take things small steps at a time. They don’t want to completely cut off their main market of families and kids, but it would be confining if they didn’t push their limits. The next 10 years, with John Carter of Mars and 1906, is when we will really see the fruits of Pixar’s labour, and the result of the planning they’ve had since day one to release mature Pixar films.

I have to admit I’m having my doubts about how much I’d enjoy a Pixar film that had gratuitous violence or sexual themes, but that’s my personal taste. If Pixar wanted to do this, and it would be for the benefit of their studio, by showing they can make those kinds of stories, then I wish them all the best. But the thing about Pixar, and one of the things I love about the studio, is they don’t “do” films that look good, and would have cool action scenes, without having the story that will stand the test of time. Actually, I guess violence is one of the reasons why people go to see movies: escapism. I’m just saying Pixar wouldn’t do it without having a strong story. Regardless of what film Pixar does in the future, I’m an adult and I will go and see whichever film they make: animation or live-action, family or mature film. I’m a Pixar fan and I owe it to them. I’m sure I will at least like the films they do, if not love it, even if it is mature (or maybe even because it is mature.)

About blockbuster Pixar films: well, to me every Pixar film is a blockbuster. I’m a very big fan and the big movie event of the year for me is a Pixar film. I have tunnel vision, so I can’t compare a Pixar film to other films with a non-biased eye. I’m not really into blockbuster films like LOTR and Batman etc, but I’m sure they have the talent to create an epic story on that scale.

Pixar will make films with hard-hitting messages. Look at WALL•E. Pixar is an American animation studio. The US has one of the highest rates of obseity in the world (if not the highest). They were expressing their opinion about consumerism and the side-effects of it, one of which being obesity. They were going to release a film that was going to offend potentially half their audience. That’s a pretty bold risk to take, and very relevant. Not the most hard-hitting message, but it was still a strong point and a step in the right direction.

Pixar makes movies for themselves. Movies they would want to see. It just so happens they have very high standards for film, thankfully. Most Pixarians are children at heart. Just look at the behind-the-scenes of one of their DVDs and you’ll see what I mean. The way they can wonderfully capture and put on screen what life is like through a child’s eyes and imagination (Monsters, Inc. and WALL•E) makes my point. But the Pixarians are also adults, so naturally, they would want to see and make adult films. Limiting themselves to what a child or families would be able to see, and only that, would be a shame.

If you are of the age to not see a mature Pixar film, or do not want to, fine. But do NOT tell Pixar what they can and can’t do. Sure, the reason why we comment on Pixar’s decisions is because we want what is best for the studio (and also for selfish reasons that would benefit us), but you have to trust in them and support the decisions they make. At the end of the day, we really have no right to criticise their decisions, especially as they haven’t even yet released a mature film. Pixar deserve our support in this, and you can’t really call yourself a Pixar fan if you try to impress your own “morals” and “family values” onto them. This would only serve to mould Pixar into what you want it to be, rather than opening your mind and thinking about what the studio could be.

I would also like to see Pixar release their mature films under the Pixar brand name. Creating another name or another division would only create further distance between the “kiddie films” and “adult films”. Same with animation and live-action films. A Pixar film is a Pixar film, and they should all be released under the Pixar brand.

Lots of great reading and excellent points in this topic. A thought popped up: what about something like The Straight Story, directed by David Lynch and rated G in the States?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Straight_Story

Not a kids’ movie at all, with no violent or sexual situations. Just great story and human interest for general audiences, something that seems to be right up Pixar’s alley. The next thought that popped up was Up, released after all the previous posts were made. The Straight Story and Up share some thematic similarities, and Up would certainly qualify as a blockbuster. Maybe Pixar already achieved what some folks were getting at here.

Just curious if there are any post-Up thoughts on this topic…

The thing is, some of the greatest films in history, like Raiders Of The Lost Ark, It’s A Wonderful Life, Sunset Boluvard, To Kill A Mockingbird and so forth are U and PG rated. If theres no need for explosions, violence and obsenity, then why put it in? Mature topics is a different thing all together, and Pixar often put some in their films (for example, losing a wife and then a child is a parents worst nightmare, a la Finding Nemo, and then there was pretty much an apocolypse in Wall-E, and whilst the film was charming, IMO that situation is a very scary thought). But why bother if theres no need?
I despise films that feel the need to put the F-word in every sentence just to make it sound more grown up, or when something has to be blown up in every scene to keep the action. It’s just bad filmmaking.

I can’t believe I read all of the responses, y’all must love writing . . . Anyways, Pixar has established an amazing balance of comedy, as well as plot, in their films so far, and they’re known for that. I don’t think that there really is a need for them to create something that pushes the boundaries or becomes a ‘blockbuster’. They’ve given a name for animated films aside from some of the glorified mediocrity that many CGI movies were and still are.

Explosions and swear words have made many movies iconic in pop culture . . .

Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn.

That’s one example.