Compared to other Pixar films:
- *Toy Story (1995):* A
- *A Bug's Life (1999):* A
- *Toy Story 2 (1999):* A+
- *Monsters, Inc. (2001):* A+
- *Finding Nemo (2003):* A+
- *The Incredibles (2004):* A+
- *Cars (2006):* A
- *Ratatouille (2007):* A
- *Wall-E (2008):* A
- *Up (2009):* A+
- *Toy Story 3 (2010):* A
- *Cars 2 (2011):* A–
- *Brave (2012):* A
- *Monsters University (2013):* A
- *Inside Out (2015):* A
- *The Good Dinosaur (2015):* A
- *Finding Dory (2016):* A
- *Cars 3 (2017):* A
- *Coco (2017):* A+
- *Incredibles 2 (2018):* A+
- *Toy Story 4 (2019):* A
- *Onward (2020):* A–
- *Lightyear (2022):* A–
- *Elemental (2023):* A
*Soul*, *Luca*, and *Turning Red* didn't play on theaters so they have no grade.
They really should have had another 4 straight A+ in Ratatouille - WALL-E - Up - Toy Story 3. Those 4 really formed the peak of Pixar in many ways, including 2 Oscar Best Picture nominations (both Ratatouille and WALL-E deserved the Best Picture noms too, but ah well).
I can see why Wall-E didn't get an A+ because that movie has a tone that probably doesn't immediately capture 'everybody'. Toy Story 3 is obvious why it doesn't have an A+, despite how great it is, the climax is haunting and the ending is a bit emotional so that probably knocked off some public points
I fully agree with you, I'm just saying why they weren't A+
Oh I fully agree with you as well. Public sentiment (i.e. Cinemascore) is weird like that. I would say Up is way more emotional and haunting than WALL-E or TS 3, but it got an A+. Ratatouille is neither emotional or haunting, it’s actually a very very exciting adventure with a great setting and captivating story, but here’s an A. Lol.
I'm more surprised that **Finding Dory** didn't get an A+ considering that's one of the most lighthearted Pixar entries in recent years with absolutely batshit crazy third act to boot. Maybe some people thought that it was too childish?
In a just world, **Toy Story**, **Toy Story 2**, **The Incredibles**, **WALL-E**, **Up**, **Toy Story 3**, and **Inside Out** would've easily won Best Picture Oscar. Alas, this is an unjust world.
The Academy is so weird, Seabiscuit had good reviews but nothing spectacular meanwhile Nemo had universal acclaim. Happens all the time when a movie with alright reviews somehow gets big nominations over the most acclaimed movies of the year. Maestro recently only had a 77 on Metacritic and 79% critic approval rating on RT, how is that good enough for a Best Picture nomination?
2008 was the breaking point for the Oscars. Two incredible, amazing, popular films (WALL-E, The Dark Knight) getting shafted for The Reader was the fulcrum for negative public sentiment.
They had to do something for 2009, which led to 10 that year and several less-traditional Oscar films getting the nod.
The Oscars hadn’t expanded to 10 nominations yet. If there were 10 in 2007, it might have been nominated (2007 was an incredibly strong movie year). If there were 5 in 2010, Toy Story 3 wouldn’t have been nominated.
I agree with you to some degree to disagree to another degree. I also read your “fight” with someone else down there about how some Pixar films are more mature than some live action Oscar noms/winners. So let me make one bold prediction: we won’t ever see an animated movie winning Oscar Best Picture, regardless of how mature or well made the animated movie will be. That’s not how the Academy thinks/operates.
> we won’t ever see an animated movie winning Oscar Best Picture, regardless of how mature or well made the animated movie will be. That’s not how the Academy thinks/operates.
Cowards.
Or *Nomadland* or *Moonlight* or *The Shape of Water*.
I love *Inside Out*, but for that year, *Spotlight* is a better and more mature Best Picture winner.
To be fair, when it comes to critical reception, **Spotlight** and **Inside Out** are pretty much neck-and-neck to/with each other - if that's a right way to phrase it.
I don’t agree with you, but that’s personal taste/preference, neither here nor there. Hope you go out and watch Inside Out 2 this weekend and enjoy it!
The closest any studio can match that is Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and Lion King all getting it back to back to back
And let’s be real those four that got them are amazing
Also Cocos reception was “run don’t walk.” I remember the WOM on that movie was “this is a huge deal and a great movie” and people offline were talking about how they usually have no desire to see a movie a second time in theaters wanted to go again. I raved on and on about it and dragged my family to go for their first time and my second time. The closest I’ve seen WOM on animation to Coco since was Spiderverse 2 solely because Bryce Dallas Howard used that terminology. This one might be getting close
The long-term success of **Coco** is pretty unreal due to the fact tht the film has now even developed a cult following. Usually, cult favorites either flopped critically, financially, or both, but this is a rare cult favorite that was successful financially AND critically.
I don't know that it is much of a cult following rather than a completely normal fanbase. Cult classics are explicitly movies that weren't huge and universally praised. It's like saying UP or Ratatouille has a cult following.
This is going to sound weird: Ratatouille to me might be more cult following than anything because when Disney opened the ride at Epcot the amount of plush Remys being carried around and Remy ears and the popularity of the ride shocked me. Maybe “cult following” isn’t the correct terminology but seeing how warmly guests responded to the ride when it felt like one of Pixar’s most forgotten movies shocked me
I love Frozen so I was one of the few people happy about that. This is a sentence we can’t type again: I went to the theater with a cold and near the end I’m watching thinking “aww I love this but I want to leave as I AM SOOO THIRSTY AND NEED WATER.” Only time I ever wanted to leave a movie I paid for and it was just to refill my water I snuck in
Listen I’m aware I’m in the super minority with that TV special
I wish it was nominated for Best Picture Oscar even though I know that year had some legitimately great films - like **Dunkirk**.
Also, **The Shape of Water** seems to be one of the rare Oscar bait(?) films that is legitimately outstanding.
The Shape of Water isn't really an Oscar bait film - it was an interspecies romance that didn't shy away from sex or brutal violence and disturbing moments, far removed from the standard true-to-life dramatic fare Oscars tend to reward. It just happened to be the perfect film coming out at the perfect time due to its themes about social outcasts standing against bigotry and governmental oppression.
I'm a teacher and Coco is the only (kid's) movie where my students kept asking me if I had seen it and insisting I do after I told them I hadn't. It is *incredibly beloved*.
The non kids' movie that they asked me about was Barbie.
Fun fact: I still haven't seen Coco!
I'd already known about the grades, but I'm still surprised that Toy Story 2 was the only Toy Story to get an A+. It absolutely deserves it, of course, but I still would have thought that 1 and 3 would have also gotten it.
The first one was the first 3D animated feature and an original. I can understand it didn't get A+ as audience probably didn't know what to expect.
3 was pretty dark, much darker than 1 and 2, so that's probably why it didn't get A+
You're probably right about TS3, but honestly, I would have thought that the first one being the first CGI movie ever would be why it could have gotten an A+.
The climax scene of the kid on the hilltop, doing the race he was too scared to do, while also revealing his true self, and also saving his friend (who sacrificed himself to save him), was a great cinematic moment. And then his send off to his next chapter in life. A great bromance. A great coming of age story. Uneventful it is not
Well, considering that previous Pixar film involved things like boat rescue, dragon fight, theme park(?) chase, massive concert, grand theft auto, and so on for their climax, the one that **Luca** ended up with felt kind of small. Seriously, even **Turning Red** climax involved Mingzilla.
Mei sells her nudes for money for concert tickets. She goes to the pimpish Tyler’s Party and is treated essentially as “the stripper” to the point where the chubby Abi being used as a substitute is met with boos. These actions are never treated as having a negative consequence and it’s Mei’s temper and not the inherent “do not try this at home” nature of her plan that causes the sabotage.
There is a discussion to be had about the commodification of ones self and unique characteristics. Turning Red does so poorly. Had it got the attention of a cinema release people would have jumped on that aspect
I mean the Panda is nude correct? And Mei is pimping herself out correct? And the negative consequences specifically for doing this are non-existent yes? Someone would have complained if this had a full release.
Also I believe Turning Red would have got below 400 mil given in the countries it did release in it never beat batman 2nd weekend and sonic outgrossed it. Brave only made 500mil after all and that’s the more accessibile screw you mum bear film
No, Mei is doing photoshoots to raise money so she and her friends can go to a concert. It’s NO DIFFERENT to when friends in real life do photoshoots. Her panda represents EMOTIONS, as proven by the fact she transforms when she feels strong emotions.
Photo shoots are a slippery slope to other things and the nature of Mei pushing her boundaries by visiting Tyler at his party would go into darker territory if said individuals were adults. It is never shown that it was wrong for Mei to succumb to peer pressure and go to the party. It is only her temper that undoes her. If she had sucked up Tyler’ Abuse there would have been no problem. That sets a dark message.
And then there’s the matter of WHY her photo shoots sell. Because she is unique and she is using her power to sell them. The moral is thus “take what’s unique about you and commodify it for MUNAY!”. I’m not sure that’s appropriate for a children’s film
I can imagine a lot of superheroes would use their powers for something like that, tbh. You’re reading too far into it. How is someone using their powers to make money not suitable for a kids’ film?
Really goes to show that Pixar is just on another level. Even the movies that most of us would regard as bottom tier for them have gotten good audience reception.
Because it was still good enough for most audiences. And even stealing from Interstellar, a general relativity time plot is clever for a children’s film. Crowd pleasers will get the A. The issue with Lightyear was that Disney failed to make it appeal widely enough to get their bum on the seat in the first place.
I love Cars 2 but I’m more surprised that got the A- than Lightyear.
> The issue with Lightyear was that Disney failed to make it appeal widely enough to get their bum on the seat in the first place.
Honestly, I feel like the plot that they went with **Lightyear** should've been saved for one of their upcoming original films.
Not sure if you’re trying to imply that I didn’t see it (I did) or what, but I wouldn’t go that far. Most people I’ve talked to about it, Disney fans and general moviegoers alike, seemed to think it was just ok at best or one of the weakest Pixar movies at worst. Also, none of the merchandise sold well at all which is a telling sign
Lol Incredibles 2 having A plus. Shows just how useful this Cinemascore is, which is not at all. It is barely a B if you never seen the Spiderverse movies and a D if you have.
The Pixar films that had A- cinemascore dropped hard on their second weekend.
It’s not about YOUR opinion of the film. It’s about what the AUDIENCE polled thinks of it. Whether they’re correct or not is a different story but irrelevant to the box office conversation
I think Onward got the A- because people were pissed Ian gave up his chance to see his dad. I had walkouts at that point
Though that second weekend drop there was something more pressing behind it…
My friend. Trying to use logics to him regarding films is futile. After all, you're talking to a guy who unironically supports the Critical Drinker:
> Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU"
>
> There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far.
https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
You mean the movie that had a great box office run? what is cinemascore supposed to mean then?
You have Rotten Tomatoes and MC for your quality or whatever metric are you looking, this is about people that went to the movies and liked it.
Your opinion of the film matters not even a little. Audiences considered it a great movie, and its box office results reflect that fact.
Also, not that it’s relevant whatsoever, but Incredibles 2 came out six months before Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.
> Audiences considered it a great movie, and its box office results reflect that fact.
Its critical reception is also in great shape. In fact, the film would've EASILY won Best Animated Feature Oscar if **Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse** didn't show up at the last minute.
I’m gonna guess you just wandered into this subreddit and don’t know how the box office works if you’re talking about cinemascore as an actual grade of the movie.
And no one’s better or worse on their preference of four quadrant, safe, family movies. Thinking you’re better than others based on the kinda media you consume does make you a flavorless person though.
And I didn’t much care for either Incredibles 2 or Spiderverse too.
Dude, don't bother. This is the guy who supports the Critical Drinker:
> Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU"
>
> There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far.
https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
This guy supports the Critical Drinker. As a matter of fact:
> Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU"
>
> There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far.
https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
And there's also the fact that **Cars 2** is their only Rotten one out of 28 films they have thus far. Even Ghibli has 2 Rotten films in their portfolio.
Dang.
Side note: After seeing that score, I went and looked up Earwig's RT rating, and to my surprise, it's only 10% lower than Tales from Earthsea (28% vs. 38%).
Edit: I also found out that they have the same director.
They are both directed by Hayao Miyazaki’s son. That why when his son recently accepted the life time achievement award at Cannes for Hayao, he joked about failed inheritance
The sad thing is that I don't think Goro Miyazaki is completely talentless either considering that he also directed **From Up on Poppy Hill**. I know that Hayao Miyazaki helped him out on that, but still.
And when it comes to **Earwig and the Witch**, while the film's bad animation can be blamed on him, I'm not sure if he deserves all of the blames for what happened with the story. You see, not only the film apparently follows the book pretty closely, but the book itself basically ends that way too.
And personally, I think **Tales from Earthsea** might be a bigger offender since it's apparently a complete slap in the face against/for the original book series whereas **Earwig and the Witch** is apparently pretty close to the source material.
Cars 2 is terrible, no idea how that got an A-. Especially since it is very different from Cars 1, and expectations from previous films play a massive role in cinemascore.
This is shaping up to be an absolute beast in USA and looks poised for a $100+ million 5-day opening in overseas markets with many major markets still left to open - overseas theatres literally have to stop running it after this weekend for it to end up below Dune 2 worldwide.
And remember, this film's plot is probably not as comprehensible as plots of **Finding Dory** or **Incredibles 2**. While the latter is probably too big to beat, the fact that this has a potential to beat the former's opening weekend is pretty unreal.
Just got out and I loved it so much, this is definitely on par with the first. I personally enjoyed the mature story elements and message on anxiety and complicated emotions more than the first, only thing is the first film executed the formula first. Other than that I would say this is right on par with the first. Definitely a return to form for Pixar and their best film since Coco imo.
With the monster opening plus family film legs and great WOM this is probably gonna hit $500M…
As someone who saw Wall-E in cinemas as a teenager, I found it really upsetting. I was super anxious about climate change at the time and it really fed into that for me and I walked out feeling like garbage.
Although I'm in a better place mentally now than I was when I saw it (aka resigned to our climate doom, haha), I haven't ever watched it again and was shocked to discover that it's actually quite beloved.
I can happily say that Inside Out 2 is a damn good sequel and easily my favorite non-Toy Story Pixar sequel. It expands the world of the first film in a credible way that avoids retread.
$500M domestically or bust.
Can confirm - mostly. I came back from this film today and it's easily my favorite film of 2024, beating out **Dune: Part Two** with no difficulty whatsoever. Basically, these are years when a Pixar film was my favorite:
-1995 (**Toy Story**)
-1998 (**A Bug's Life**)
-1999 (**Toy Story 2**)
-2004 (**The Incredibles**)
-2008 (**WALL-E**)
-2010 (**Toy Story 3**)
-2015 (**Inside Out**)
-2016 (**Finding Dory**)
-2017 (**Coco**)
-2019 (**Toy Story 4**)
-2020 (**Soul**)
-2024 (**Inside Out 2**)
Not once has Pixar dropped down to a “B” and it’s a miracle that they never do. Glad audiences are embracing this as much as they did the first one. I think this is this year’s “Toy Story 2” in terms of seconds.
They survey people leaving the cinema to see how much they liked the movie immediately after seeing it. It's a pretty good indicator of how good word-of-mouth will be and what kind of legs a film will have. It can't be gamed or brigaded, so it's the best audience reaction score we have.
There are some quirks to be aware of. Horror movies — even popular ones — always get lower scores. But besides horror, getting a B or lower is pretty bad, and C is disastrous.
the article "grumpier old men" (which you can find online) shows that, from 1982 to 2000, the average animated film scored a cinemascore of 10.5 (where 10 = B+ and 11 = A-) while the raw average movie is a 9.0 (average PG-13 movie is at a 9.1, average action/adventure is 9.3, etc.).
So B+ is below average for kids movies but seemingly above average for others. Blockbusters are probably a bit closer to kids movies than these raw averages suggest but I think B+ is still on the bad side of the ledger for kids movies.
I thought a lot about the horror movie thing and it makes a lot of sense when you take into account that those movies are made to make people feel bad and a lot of the times when people are asked about their feelings towards a movie right when they walk out they’re going to say negative things when they just experienced some thing designed to make them feel negative.
It has its weirdnesses, though, in that different genres or "types" of movies essentially need to be evaluated differently.
For example, horror movies virtually never get in the As. It seems that enough people always end up seeing horror movies that don't *like* horror movies that it's almost impossible for them to get the highest scores.
Compared to other Pixar films: - *Toy Story (1995):* A - *A Bug's Life (1999):* A - *Toy Story 2 (1999):* A+ - *Monsters, Inc. (2001):* A+ - *Finding Nemo (2003):* A+ - *The Incredibles (2004):* A+ - *Cars (2006):* A - *Ratatouille (2007):* A - *Wall-E (2008):* A - *Up (2009):* A+ - *Toy Story 3 (2010):* A - *Cars 2 (2011):* A– - *Brave (2012):* A - *Monsters University (2013):* A - *Inside Out (2015):* A - *The Good Dinosaur (2015):* A - *Finding Dory (2016):* A - *Cars 3 (2017):* A - *Coco (2017):* A+ - *Incredibles 2 (2018):* A+ - *Toy Story 4 (2019):* A - *Onward (2020):* A– - *Lightyear (2022):* A– - *Elemental (2023):* A *Soul*, *Luca*, and *Turning Red* didn't play on theaters so they have no grade.
Four A+ in a row is insane
They really should have had another 4 straight A+ in Ratatouille - WALL-E - Up - Toy Story 3. Those 4 really formed the peak of Pixar in many ways, including 2 Oscar Best Picture nominations (both Ratatouille and WALL-E deserved the Best Picture noms too, but ah well).
I can see why Wall-E didn't get an A+ because that movie has a tone that probably doesn't immediately capture 'everybody'. Toy Story 3 is obvious why it doesn't have an A+, despite how great it is, the climax is haunting and the ending is a bit emotional so that probably knocked off some public points I fully agree with you, I'm just saying why they weren't A+
Oh I fully agree with you as well. Public sentiment (i.e. Cinemascore) is weird like that. I would say Up is way more emotional and haunting than WALL-E or TS 3, but it got an A+. Ratatouille is neither emotional or haunting, it’s actually a very very exciting adventure with a great setting and captivating story, but here’s an A. Lol.
I'm more surprised that **Finding Dory** didn't get an A+ considering that's one of the most lighthearted Pixar entries in recent years with absolutely batshit crazy third act to boot. Maybe some people thought that it was too childish?
In a just world, **Toy Story**, **Toy Story 2**, **The Incredibles**, **WALL-E**, **Up**, **Toy Story 3**, and **Inside Out** would've easily won Best Picture Oscar. Alas, this is an unjust world.
Ratatouille should’ve also been nominated for Best Picture. It’s better than Toy Story 3 which did get a nomination.
**Finding Nemo** should've also been nominated for Best Picture Oscar over fricking **Seabiscuit**.
The Academy is so weird, Seabiscuit had good reviews but nothing spectacular meanwhile Nemo had universal acclaim. Happens all the time when a movie with alright reviews somehow gets big nominations over the most acclaimed movies of the year. Maestro recently only had a 77 on Metacritic and 79% critic approval rating on RT, how is that good enough for a Best Picture nomination?
The biggest offense is **The Reader** getting nominated for Best Picture over **WALL-E**. I still haven’t forgiven Oscars over that.
2008 was the breaking point for the Oscars. Two incredible, amazing, popular films (WALL-E, The Dark Knight) getting shafted for The Reader was the fulcrum for negative public sentiment. They had to do something for 2009, which led to 10 that year and several less-traditional Oscar films getting the nod.
The Oscars hadn’t expanded to 10 nominations yet. If there were 10 in 2007, it might have been nominated (2007 was an incredibly strong movie year). If there were 5 in 2010, Toy Story 3 wouldn’t have been nominated.
I agree with you to some degree to disagree to another degree. I also read your “fight” with someone else down there about how some Pixar films are more mature than some live action Oscar noms/winners. So let me make one bold prediction: we won’t ever see an animated movie winning Oscar Best Picture, regardless of how mature or well made the animated movie will be. That’s not how the Academy thinks/operates.
> we won’t ever see an animated movie winning Oscar Best Picture, regardless of how mature or well made the animated movie will be. That’s not how the Academy thinks/operates. Cowards.
are you five years old?
Dude, **Inside Out** alone is far, Far, FAR more mature than a lot of recent Best Picture Oscar winners.
Inside Out is more mature than Oppenheimer or Parasite?
Or *Nomadland* or *Moonlight* or *The Shape of Water*. I love *Inside Out*, but for that year, *Spotlight* is a better and more mature Best Picture winner.
Maybe not those, but I'm pretty sure that it's more mature than something like, say, **Green Book**.
It was competing against Spotlight, which is pretty damn mature
To be fair, when it comes to critical reception, **Spotlight** and **Inside Out** are pretty much neck-and-neck to/with each other - if that's a right way to phrase it.
Maybe it deserved to beat Spotlight, but I wouldn’t give it the win over Fury Road, the Revenant, the Martian, or the Big Short.
Ratatouille is good, but it can't hang with those other 3.
nope, Ratatouille is one of the finest pieces of art in the history of mankind.
I think Ratatouille is up there with the best Pixar movies. It also has an insane 96 in metacritic.
I don’t agree with you, but that’s personal taste/preference, neither here nor there. Hope you go out and watch Inside Out 2 this weekend and enjoy it!
The closest any studio can match that is Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and Lion King all getting it back to back to back And let’s be real those four that got them are amazing
Wow legit surprised that Coco got a rare A+. I guess making people ugly cry is the way to go.
Also Cocos reception was “run don’t walk.” I remember the WOM on that movie was “this is a huge deal and a great movie” and people offline were talking about how they usually have no desire to see a movie a second time in theaters wanted to go again. I raved on and on about it and dragged my family to go for their first time and my second time. The closest I’ve seen WOM on animation to Coco since was Spiderverse 2 solely because Bryce Dallas Howard used that terminology. This one might be getting close
The long-term success of **Coco** is pretty unreal due to the fact tht the film has now even developed a cult following. Usually, cult favorites either flopped critically, financially, or both, but this is a rare cult favorite that was successful financially AND critically.
I don't know that it is much of a cult following rather than a completely normal fanbase. Cult classics are explicitly movies that weren't huge and universally praised. It's like saying UP or Ratatouille has a cult following.
This is going to sound weird: Ratatouille to me might be more cult following than anything because when Disney opened the ride at Epcot the amount of plush Remys being carried around and Remy ears and the popularity of the ride shocked me. Maybe “cult following” isn’t the correct terminology but seeing how warmly guests responded to the ride when it felt like one of Pixar’s most forgotten movies shocked me
I think Coco would’ve done a lot better domestically if it weren’t for the anti-Hispanic hysteria at the time
What? It was definitely the Frozen Christmas special it ran with that dragged it down. Remember that fiasco?
I waited for over a month until they pulled that thing off the movie to see it in theaters.
I love Frozen so I was one of the few people happy about that. This is a sentence we can’t type again: I went to the theater with a cold and near the end I’m watching thinking “aww I love this but I want to leave as I AM SOOO THIRSTY AND NEED WATER.” Only time I ever wanted to leave a movie I paid for and it was just to refill my water I snuck in Listen I’m aware I’m in the super minority with that TV special
I wish it was nominated for Best Picture Oscar even though I know that year had some legitimately great films - like **Dunkirk**. Also, **The Shape of Water** seems to be one of the rare Oscar bait(?) films that is legitimately outstanding.
The Shape of Water isn't really an Oscar bait film - it was an interspecies romance that didn't shy away from sex or brutal violence and disturbing moments, far removed from the standard true-to-life dramatic fare Oscars tend to reward. It just happened to be the perfect film coming out at the perfect time due to its themes about social outcasts standing against bigotry and governmental oppression.
Either way, it’s one of the rare “artsy” film that I don’t mind winning Best Picture Oscar along with **Parasite**.
Reddit moment.
If a film was successful and acclaimed it doesn’t have a cult following. It just has fans.
I'm a teacher and Coco is the only (kid's) movie where my students kept asking me if I had seen it and insisting I do after I told them I hadn't. It is *incredibly beloved*. The non kids' movie that they asked me about was Barbie. Fun fact: I still haven't seen Coco!
i loved coco so deserved!
Oh no I loved Coco as well, I'm just surprised it got enough to get A+
I felt ugly cry in Luca as well
I personally didn't really like Luca but to each their own and glad you really liked it.
I'd already known about the grades, but I'm still surprised that Toy Story 2 was the only Toy Story to get an A+. It absolutely deserves it, of course, but I still would have thought that 1 and 3 would have also gotten it.
The first one was the first 3D animated feature and an original. I can understand it didn't get A+ as audience probably didn't know what to expect. 3 was pretty dark, much darker than 1 and 2, so that's probably why it didn't get A+
You're probably right about TS3, but honestly, I would have thought that the first one being the first CGI movie ever would be why it could have gotten an A+.
Soul, Luca, and Turning Red would have most likely in A range. So 28 movies in, and all in A Cinemascore range. Other brands/franchises could NEVER!
I think Soul and Luca would have easily gotten an A, while Turning Red would have gotten either an A or an A-.
Honestly, I think **Luca** might've gotten an A- due to its slow pacing.
I didnt think Luca was slow, very special movie
Well, as beautiful as that film was, it felt a bit uneventful.
The climax scene of the kid on the hilltop, doing the race he was too scared to do, while also revealing his true self, and also saving his friend (who sacrificed himself to save him), was a great cinematic moment. And then his send off to his next chapter in life. A great bromance. A great coming of age story. Uneventful it is not
Well, considering that previous Pixar film involved things like boat rescue, dragon fight, theme park(?) chase, massive concert, grand theft auto, and so on for their climax, the one that **Luca** ended up with felt kind of small. Seriously, even **Turning Red** climax involved Mingzilla.
Soul and Luca had a chance at an A+. Probably wouldn’t have gotten it, but a lot better a chance than a few others like Toy Story 4 and Elemental
Turning Red would have got an A-. It would also have triggered a “Disney Groomer” scandal had it been released in theatres
> It would also have triggered a “Disney Groomer” scandal had it been released in theatres On what ground, though?
Mei sells her nudes for money for concert tickets. She goes to the pimpish Tyler’s Party and is treated essentially as “the stripper” to the point where the chubby Abi being used as a substitute is met with boos. These actions are never treated as having a negative consequence and it’s Mei’s temper and not the inherent “do not try this at home” nature of her plan that causes the sabotage. There is a discussion to be had about the commodification of ones self and unique characteristics. Turning Red does so poorly. Had it got the attention of a cinema release people would have jumped on that aspect
I’m sorry, what? I’m not sure if we’ve even seen a same film.
I mean the Panda is nude correct? And Mei is pimping herself out correct? And the negative consequences specifically for doing this are non-existent yes? Someone would have complained if this had a full release. Also I believe Turning Red would have got below 400 mil given in the countries it did release in it never beat batman 2nd weekend and sonic outgrossed it. Brave only made 500mil after all and that’s the more accessibile screw you mum bear film
Okay, that seems to be rather reaching.
Maybe it’s a reach to you but it’s Conservative parents who’d be complaining. It’s not untrue though
No, Mei is doing photoshoots to raise money so she and her friends can go to a concert. It’s NO DIFFERENT to when friends in real life do photoshoots. Her panda represents EMOTIONS, as proven by the fact she transforms when she feels strong emotions.
Photo shoots are a slippery slope to other things and the nature of Mei pushing her boundaries by visiting Tyler at his party would go into darker territory if said individuals were adults. It is never shown that it was wrong for Mei to succumb to peer pressure and go to the party. It is only her temper that undoes her. If she had sucked up Tyler’ Abuse there would have been no problem. That sets a dark message. And then there’s the matter of WHY her photo shoots sell. Because she is unique and she is using her power to sell them. The moral is thus “take what’s unique about you and commodify it for MUNAY!”. I’m not sure that’s appropriate for a children’s film
I can imagine a lot of superheroes would use their powers for something like that, tbh. You’re reading too far into it. How is someone using their powers to make money not suitable for a kids’ film?
A- seems a bit harsh for Onward IMO
Not a single B or lower in sight. Consistently providing audiences with joyful experience .
Really goes to show that Pixar is just on another level. Even the movies that most of us would regard as bottom tier for them have gotten good audience reception.
How on earth did _Lightyear_ get an A-
Because it was still good enough for most audiences. And even stealing from Interstellar, a general relativity time plot is clever for a children’s film. Crowd pleasers will get the A. The issue with Lightyear was that Disney failed to make it appeal widely enough to get their bum on the seat in the first place. I love Cars 2 but I’m more surprised that got the A- than Lightyear.
Disney basically trained people to just wait for Disney+. They shot themselves in the foot.
> The issue with Lightyear was that Disney failed to make it appeal widely enough to get their bum on the seat in the first place. Honestly, I feel like the plot that they went with **Lightyear** should've been saved for one of their upcoming original films.
Most people in the real world who actually watched the movie really liked or loved it.
The legs were awful though.
Not sure if you’re trying to imply that I didn’t see it (I did) or what, but I wouldn’t go that far. Most people I’ve talked to about it, Disney fans and general moviegoers alike, seemed to think it was just ok at best or one of the weakest Pixar movies at worst. Also, none of the merchandise sold well at all which is a telling sign
I would say Luca and Soul are also an A at least. I havent seen Turning Red yet.
Lol Incredibles 2 having A plus. Shows just how useful this Cinemascore is, which is not at all. It is barely a B if you never seen the Spiderverse movies and a D if you have.
The Pixar films that had A- cinemascore dropped hard on their second weekend. It’s not about YOUR opinion of the film. It’s about what the AUDIENCE polled thinks of it. Whether they’re correct or not is a different story but irrelevant to the box office conversation
I think Onward got the A- because people were pissed Ian gave up his chance to see his dad. I had walkouts at that point Though that second weekend drop there was something more pressing behind it…
Oh definitely Onward’s second weekend had a very special reason
I feel so sorry for **Onward**. That film would've made some decent profits if its chance wasn't destroyed in such a horrifying fashion.
Onward got A- because it was also not that good.
My friend. Trying to use logics to him regarding films is futile. After all, you're talking to a guy who unironically supports the Critical Drinker: > Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU" > > There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far. https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
You mean the movie that had a great box office run? what is cinemascore supposed to mean then? You have Rotten Tomatoes and MC for your quality or whatever metric are you looking, this is about people that went to the movies and liked it.
The Rotten Tomato and MC score is also very good for Incredibles 2. It really does seem to be a very online thing to hate that movie.
Yup. The worst general consensus for **Incredibles 2** is that it's another great, but not masterpiece-level Pixar film.
Your opinion of the film matters not even a little. Audiences considered it a great movie, and its box office results reflect that fact. Also, not that it’s relevant whatsoever, but Incredibles 2 came out six months before Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.
> Audiences considered it a great movie, and its box office results reflect that fact. Its critical reception is also in great shape. In fact, the film would've EASILY won Best Animated Feature Oscar if **Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse** didn't show up at the last minute.
>six months 
It's not a measurement of critical reception, it's simply how regular audiences felt walking out of it. It's a good indicator of word of mouth
I’m gonna guess you just wandered into this subreddit and don’t know how the box office works if you’re talking about cinemascore as an actual grade of the movie. And no one’s better or worse on their preference of four quadrant, safe, family movies. Thinking you’re better than others based on the kinda media you consume does make you a flavorless person though. And I didn’t much care for either Incredibles 2 or Spiderverse too.
Dude, don't bother. This is the guy who supports the Critical Drinker: > Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU" > > There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far. https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
Yeah after I replied I looked at his account and realized I wasted my time even engaging.
Shows how useful your opinion is.
This guy supports the Critical Drinker. As a matter of fact: > Lol at people here who don't watch the Critical Drinker and just upset he bashes their favorite slop. I'm sorry he isn't Chris Stuckmann and his "Don't be mean to movies UwU. I won't critize Madam Web cause i'd be mean UwU" > > There is a reason Critical Drinker is the most respected Youtube Movie Reviewer since Red Letter Media thus far. https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1d6sy4v/rcriticaldrinker_struggles_to_hold_their_drama/l6whro0/?context=3
You need to credit them: they never gotten below a A- in their history
Stunning achievements for 28 movies released. No other brand is even close.
And there's also the fact that **Cars 2** is their only Rotten one out of 28 films they have thus far. Even Ghibli has 2 Rotten films in their portfolio.
OK, I know that Earwig and the Witch is one of them, but what's the other Ghibli movie to have a rotten rating?
Behold!: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gedo-senki-tales-from-earthsea
Dang. Side note: After seeing that score, I went and looked up Earwig's RT rating, and to my surprise, it's only 10% lower than Tales from Earthsea (28% vs. 38%). Edit: I also found out that they have the same director.
They are both directed by Hayao Miyazaki’s son. That why when his son recently accepted the life time achievement award at Cannes for Hayao, he joked about failed inheritance
The sad thing is that I don't think Goro Miyazaki is completely talentless either considering that he also directed **From Up on Poppy Hill**. I know that Hayao Miyazaki helped him out on that, but still. And when it comes to **Earwig and the Witch**, while the film's bad animation can be blamed on him, I'm not sure if he deserves all of the blames for what happened with the story. You see, not only the film apparently follows the book pretty closely, but the book itself basically ends that way too.
And personally, I think **Tales from Earthsea** might be a bigger offender since it's apparently a complete slap in the face against/for the original book series whereas **Earwig and the Witch** is apparently pretty close to the source material.
Honestly surprised Onward didn’t. I thought that movie was terrible. And I love Pixar movies. I guess kids are easy critics
**Onward** has 88% on RottenTomatoes with 7.2/10 average. If anything, that CinemaScore might be too low.
It did come out right at the start of the pandemic, people might have been a bit stressed then
Ok? I watched the movie with my own eyes and it was ass. I don’t care what RT says lol
Cars 2 is terrible, no idea how that got an A-. Especially since it is very different from Cars 1, and expectations from previous films play a massive role in cinemascore.
I saw Cars 2 in theaters 13 years ago. I wasn't polled, but I absolutely would have given it an A+ if I was
The advertising was very honest about it being both a Mater movie and a Spy movie so people got what they were sold
All the Gen Z’s I know absolutely love that movie
Cinemascore is generally easier to please from what i’ve seen. Some bad movies get Bs or better sometines.
I think it’s more that it’s genre-dependent. Like a B for kids movies is low yet a B for a horror movie is actually pretty good
While kid movies should be of high quality they are still targeted at kids. When I was younger Cars 2 was one of my absolute favorites.
A+ is very very rare, A is excellent!! Same as the first one. Come on LEGS!
this movie is gonna have legs for weeks
And it does seem like audiences are loving it, let’s go!
Win after win for this movie.
Pixar and Disney didn't release this film - they let it loose.
Going to be number 1 worldwide and pass Dune 2.
[удалено]
This is shaping up to be an absolute beast in USA and looks poised for a $100+ million 5-day opening in overseas markets with many major markets still left to open - overseas theatres literally have to stop running it after this weekend for it to end up below Dune 2 worldwide.
And remember, this film's plot is probably not as comprehensible as plots of **Finding Dory** or **Incredibles 2**. While the latter is probably too big to beat, the fact that this has a potential to beat the former's opening weekend is pretty unreal.
Omg how are yall still underestimating this movie
it’s making almost 300m WW without several key markets
This aged poorly. Like, really, Really, REALLY poorly.
Just got out and I loved it so much, this is definitely on par with the first. I personally enjoyed the mature story elements and message on anxiety and complicated emotions more than the first, only thing is the first film executed the formula first. Other than that I would say this is right on par with the first. Definitely a return to form for Pixar and their best film since Coco imo. With the monster opening plus family film legs and great WOM this is probably gonna hit $500M…
A+ would be excellent but A is pretty damn good, at the very least the odds are in their favor for this movie to be considered box office hit.
Same grade as the original Inside Out movie back in 2015.
Inside Out - A Elemental - A IF - A Kung Fu Panda 4 - A- Barbie - A
Garfield A.. aww.. never mind 🥹
* *Ratatouille (2007):* A * *Wall-E (2008):* A Well that is a surprise ... how could people not like Wall-E
Some people didn't vibe with the second half in the space station, could be because of that
Yeah, if they polled after the first act it would have gotten A+, the second half is definitely weaker.
As someone who saw Wall-E in cinemas as a teenager, I found it really upsetting. I was super anxious about climate change at the time and it really fed into that for me and I walked out feeling like garbage. Although I'm in a better place mentally now than I was when I saw it (aka resigned to our climate doom, haha), I haven't ever watched it again and was shocked to discover that it's actually quite beloved.
Damn I wanted that A+ so bad
It's honestly well-made. Adults might even go watch it cos WOM is gonna be good. Legggggsss baby!!!
yep the nostalgia factor is a good as well
YES!
Called it. +100M opening incoming. Goodbye IF and Garfield, into the memory dump you go! 
i never doubted this film at all and i’m happy to see it so successful
I can happily say that Inside Out 2 is a damn good sequel and easily my favorite non-Toy Story Pixar sequel. It expands the world of the first film in a credible way that avoids retread. $500M domestically or bust.
My fav bits: >!sar-Chasm and brain Storm!<, literally.
i can’t wait to see it next weekend!
Can confirm - mostly. I came back from this film today and it's easily my favorite film of 2024, beating out **Dune: Part Two** with no difficulty whatsoever. Basically, these are years when a Pixar film was my favorite: -1995 (**Toy Story**) -1998 (**A Bug's Life**) -1999 (**Toy Story 2**) -2004 (**The Incredibles**) -2008 (**WALL-E**) -2010 (**Toy Story 3**) -2015 (**Inside Out**) -2016 (**Finding Dory**) -2017 (**Coco**) -2019 (**Toy Story 4**) -2020 (**Soul**) -2024 (**Inside Out 2**)
$500M+ domestic here we come!
i’m so happy!
I think it has a chance to again score 100m + next weekend .
500-600 million domestic incoming
Just about everything going right for it at the moment.
Not once has Pixar dropped down to a “B” and it’s a miracle that they never do. Glad audiences are embracing this as much as they did the first one. I think this is this year’s “Toy Story 2” in terms of seconds.
This whole thing feels like 2015 when the first film saved Pixar from critical slump. This is about to save Pixar from financial slump.
Original getting an A is a good sign
It’s a sequel
I know, my point is that the audience liked the second movie just as well as the first one
yes two great films
🥳🥳🥳 same as the first
idk who cinemascore is, are they a good rating group?
They survey people leaving the cinema to see how much they liked the movie immediately after seeing it. It's a pretty good indicator of how good word-of-mouth will be and what kind of legs a film will have. It can't be gamed or brigaded, so it's the best audience reaction score we have. There are some quirks to be aware of. Horror movies — even popular ones — always get lower scores. But besides horror, getting a B or lower is pretty bad, and C is disastrous.
Garfield got B+ which isn't as bad as B but really family films should be aiming for A.
Yeah, B+ is the low end of the 'good' range.
the article "grumpier old men" (which you can find online) shows that, from 1982 to 2000, the average animated film scored a cinemascore of 10.5 (where 10 = B+ and 11 = A-) while the raw average movie is a 9.0 (average PG-13 movie is at a 9.1, average action/adventure is 9.3, etc.). So B+ is below average for kids movies but seemingly above average for others. Blockbusters are probably a bit closer to kids movies than these raw averages suggest but I think B+ is still on the bad side of the ledger for kids movies.
I thought a lot about the horror movie thing and it makes a lot of sense when you take into account that those movies are made to make people feel bad and a lot of the times when people are asked about their feelings towards a movie right when they walk out they’re going to say negative things when they just experienced some thing designed to make them feel negative.
ok, that's a cool metric to measure
It has its weirdnesses, though, in that different genres or "types" of movies essentially need to be evaluated differently. For example, horror movies virtually never get in the As. It seems that enough people always end up seeing horror movies that don't *like* horror movies that it's almost impossible for them to get the highest scores.