Addressing the anti-Pixar

Arguably, they have been the studio that has made the best animated movies over the course of the last decade, yet there is certainly a wave of anti-Pixar sentiment building as their cast of popular characters continues its migration into attractions at Disney Parks worldwide. As usual, it is a small, but very vocal minority of the Disney passionate decrying the “Pixar-ization” of the company’s theme parks. However, it is disturbing in that, up until the recent merger between the two entertainment powerhouses, Pixar, its films, and the creative talents behind them, have been almost universally embraced by the Mouseketeer faithful.

It is interesting if you compare the influx of attractions based on the films of the early 1990s (Mermaid, Beauty & Beast, Aladdin, Lion King) which represented a Disney animation renaissance, to the current level of Pixar-themed development.

Take for example:

The Little Mermaid - The Voyage of The Little Mermaid (Disney-MGM), Ariel’s Grotto (Magic Kingdom) and the entire and very elaborate Mermaid Lagoon themed port at Tokyo DisneySea.

Beauty and the Beast - The long running Beauty and the Beast stage show at Disney-MGM.

Aladdin - Magic Carpets of Aladdin (Magic Kingdom), Aladdin’s Magic Carpet Ride (DisneyQuest), Aladdin - Musical Spectacular (DCA), Aladdin’s Oasis (Disneyland), and The Magic Lamp Theater (Tokyo DisneySea).

The Lion King - Legend of the Lion King (Magic Kingdom), Circle of Life (Epcot), Festival of the Lion King (Animal Kingdom).

When you take into consideration that the Disney-Pixar collaborations of the past ten years represent the only over-the-top successes the company has enjoyed since The Lion King, their recent exploitations of these films and their characters, when compared to past history, are neither excessive nor overdone. Since the very beginnings of Disneyland, Disney has consistently and often aggressively incorporated its successful animation properties into its theme parks. The recent spate of Pixar attractions is just another chapter in that already established history.

So why all the fallout? Reading opinions across the Internet via blogs and forums, and listening to podcast pundits, its seems that the reasons are varied, occasionally well argued, but mostly irrational and sometimes mean-spirited. One primary theme keeps resurfacing in nearly all the commentaries--

Pixar isn’t Disney.

Well, it kinda is. Not even counting the recent merger of the two companies that establishes that Pixar is Disney, Pixar has always been a spiritual successor of sorts to the traditions of Disney animation, especially over the course of the last ten years.

While WDFA floundered and then ultimately imploded under the bureaucratic and creatively stagnant leadership of David Stainton and his fellow executives, it was John Lasseter, Ed Catmull, Andrew Stanton, Brad Bird and company that kept alive the basic tenants of Disney animation. It was in fact Pixar that built upon the wildly successful and Disney-dominated feature animation renaissance of the late 1980s-early 1990s, and carried the animation torch successfully into the 21st century. While The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King set a gold standard and revitalized a fading movie form, Pixar innovated and expanded animation with the advent of CGI, not unlike the way Walt Disney himself embraced technical advances such as sound synchronization, three-color Technicolor and stereophonic systems, and married them with smart storytelling and creative artistry.

It also appears to some extent that Pixar is feeling backlash relating to the recent flood of CGI animation that has been represented by a lot of recent mediocre-to-bad features. And many of these films are using MOCAP technology, a process that is viewed by many as an antithesis of traditional animation techniques. What has emerged, particularly among much of the Disney faithful, is a CGI-BAD!/traditional animation-GOOD! mentality. What is especially ironic is that John Lasseter and Ed Catmull are largely responsible for bringing back traditional animation by green lighting the upcoming Frog Princess and initiating production on new cartoon shorts.

Where Disney management has unfortunately, in my opinion, made a couple of missteps relating to Pixar attractions, involves the geographical placement of both The Seas With Nemo and Friends, and the Laugh Floor Comedy Club.

The Nemo overlay on the former Livings Seas pavilion, while incorporating an innovative and fun dark ride, and the wow! factor of Turtle Talk with Crush, almost in no way relates to Epcot’s long in place Future World theme. It’s not a Pixar issue. The same would hold true if Imagineers had used Little Mermaid characters instead of Nemo and company.

The same disconnect exists for the upcoming Laugh Floor Comedy Club, featuring characters from Monsters Inc. The retro-future overlay that was done to Tomorrowland in the mid 1990s was fun and imaginative, filled with countless clever details that reinforces its ‘future that never was” theme. But I can find nothing in Monsters Inc. that in any way relates to this vision of Tomorrowland. To me, it’s the equivalent of dropping Beauty and the Beast into Frontierland, or adding an Incredibles overlay to a part of Main Street USA.

But again, these clearly aren’t issues with Pixar content, but with the puzzling sensibilities of Walt Disney World management and Disney Imagineering. In their apparent hurried efforts to kill two birds (replacing Timekeeper and upgrading a sponsor-less Seas pavilion) with a Pixar stone, they’ve undermined their own previously well-realized creations.

And in these cases, Pixar, and its canon of beloved and popular characters, unfortunately bear the brunt of the resulting criticism and fan discontent.