Anyone else think that Pixar is running out of ideas?

Well, the guys running Pixar did say themselves that they only had fleshed out stories up till... Up. Now they're just sorta flying by the seat of their pants. Personally I haven't been as big of a fan of their post-Up movies. Brave, and Finding Dory had some interesting concepts and good visuals, but they weren't that great. Haven't seen Coco yet, but it looks really interesting, not too many films about Día de Muertos. I'm just procrastinating on seeing it cuz I know I'll be stuck watching an unnecessary half hour Frozen short before the movie starts.
Haven't seen Inside Out yet, the concept seemed kinda... dumb? I'm more into inner-thought stuff being more surreal, or abstract, and simplifying it to little people in your head isn't really my thing. Even as a kid I wasn't into that sort of thing, but I do understand the need for it. (most children aren't weird, and into surrealism like I was) Also I feel like I already saw that movie with Osmosis Jones.

I dunno, I guess it's just how you see it. Everyone gets tapped out at some point, even Don Bluth threw in the towel at some point after hitting creative bankruptcy. (Although he did start an Indiegogo a while ago for creating a Space Ace movie, which got totally funded if I remember correctly? Kinda waiting to see if something comes of that.)

It's easy to think that given the number of sequels they've released. For a while Pixar was only known for original ideas with Toy story being the only film of theirs to get a sequel. I think the combination of meh releases (Brave, The Good Dinosaur) and sequels/prequels no one asked for (Monsters University, Cars 2/3, and Finding Dory) has hurt their reputation. Although Inside Out was supposedly really good and I think Coco also got high praise?

I thought I heard some time ago that a chunk of Pixar's team went over to Disney's animation studio which is why Pixar began to decline and Disney's animated films began to come back into the spotlight. I could be remembering that wrong though so don't quote me on that.

Oo that's be awesome if they did! My procrastination would be over with.

You know, I could never really get into the Cars movies, thought they were dumb. Probably cuz I'm not into cars in general.

I have not seen Coco, so this is my opinion separate from that.

Yes, mostly because I think Pixar is sort of struggling with its identity. When Pixar was brand new, it was seen as it's own unique thing with their wholesome 3D films, during a time when most other companies were still doing 2D. But I feel now, there are many companies, including Disney's own animation department, that can make similar 3D films. So what is the point of Pixar? Heck the line between Pixar and other 3D Disney films is so blurred that a young kid can't tell the difference. I know Dreamsworks has gone the route of trying to experiment more with character models, so maybe Pixar should try to experiment more with stuff like that.

I also feel that Pixar has a lot of pressure from Disney to push out about a film a year AND the film has to translate well to merch. Added the pressure to keep up with modern 3D animation and to always add something to a film that is "new" or "wows" people. I found baby Dory's eyes in Finding Dory to be unsettling, I get they were trying to make them super detailed and HD, but I found them creepy. The plot was sort of muddled with too many side characters (for merch, my guess). I sort of wish Pixar put some more effort fixing the kinks in the story instead of worry about the super fine details.

I don't think they have lost their way...
I am pretty sure that Pixar can do much more in terms of stories and ideas, but is owned by Disney (the queen of "making a movie simply for the profit" as you say in the first post)... they don't have exactly the freedom they need to release better products.

By the way, I think a lot of movie companies have the issue of running out of ideas. There are a lot of sequels/prequels/spinoffs/remakes etc. that aren't even that good, or simply useless.
Unfortunately, money is more important than ideas, so why try to do something new when you can pick some already known characters and put them into a "new" movie? Less risks, more money. Who needs new ideas when the old ones still work so well?

This is not a good thing for cinema, and art in general. Probably if the audience starts to avoid watching the 7th remake of the same thing, probably we could see some new ideas, too. And more quality in the storylines.

Coco was good, by the way. In terms of graphics and animation, it's impressive. The story was nothing special, but it has some parts that are very sad, especially near the end, where you probably will shed a tear (ok, a lot of tears )
The worst choice in the movie? To put a 25-minutes long mini movie of Frozen. Impressive but a bit too long (and boring). I prefer Pixar's 5-minutes shorts.

Short answer: yea but not entirely

Long answer: It's not that they can not think of more ideas, it's more that they're currently prioritising sequels in order to generate more hype and make tonnes of money on them. It's certainly working if you look at Finding Dory's success. Also, despite being their worst work critically, Cars is incredibly successful financially. They've kind of done what a lot of studios are doing - they've started to focus on what sells. Toy cars sell, and so do stylised sea creatures that the audience already likes.
I'm sure they've got plenty of ideas pitching all the time, and they're just putting them off for later. There's no way that with all the talented writers they have there's no new ideas. It really wouldn't surprise me if they rode this sequelitis out for another year or two, though. It's making bank and they'll need that money to invest in the original stuff again... (That is, if they're smart enough to realise that it can be used for that)

hmmm
I feel it is rather unfair per se to hold any film company to a high standard and say they must only produce at that standard. Everyone has flops and mistakes. Film [animation especially] is still pretty goddamn new if you compare it to say opera, theater/plays, and other forms of media [outside of prose and comics..]. It's barely 100 years old counting the mainstream silent era. That's considerably not old.

As well you have to remember animation is considerably experimental, yes, even Frozen which re-used models and the like as some say. Due to this storytelling will be just as experimental and if you only stick to one set "formula" what fun is that?

I respect Pixar but I don't really consider them all that ground breaking in storytelling. Yeah they've got some good stuff. I'm a huge fan of Coco and a few others. But they are just another fish in the film company pond.

There will be flops, mehs, and greats. It's pretty harsh to put them on a pedestal and then threaten to kick them off when they don't make what someone else considers top quality.

Besides...they need profit too.
Disney has done cashcow films for this very reason.
coughlookupthestorybehindherculesvstreasureplanet*cough*

I guess what I'm getting at is...No. I don't think they're losing their way or whatever. There was never a "way" to begin with.

Am I the only one who never thought pixar was some mastermind of storytelling? I think maybe the incredibles and toy story at most were the ones stood out to me though even then I don't feel really shocked their work is lacking in recent years, I never felt they were breaking new ground to begin with. At most I can think of they broke away from the disney formula and made 3D a viable animation art form.

...And i'm a 3D major so what i'm saying is basically pure blasphemy and heresy if other 3D majors knew I said this lol

i think it's way more common then it seems
people just aren't that vocal over it due to being quieted down
/ shrugs

I don't think you can be a big name and do something different in cinema. Generally, they won't touch anything new until they've seen it done in independent cinema about a thousand times successfully. Then they start using it too.

Kind of. It's like Square Enix and the Final Fantasy franchise relationship with sequels: there comes a time that the easy money has to come in. And sequels are oh so easy money.

I don't think this means they lost their way. I thought Inside Out was wonderful, and even in their sequels, we'll always have Toy Story 3, which is what a good sequel looks like to me: full of purpose and heart while discovering new paths. I'd argue the only real bad movie Pixar ever released is Cars 2 (which is awful dear lord).
They were never the chosen one!! It's too much pressure!! Look what it did to poor Anakin???? He went bonkers!!!

@joannekwan @KoreanTacos Bug's Life was my favorite as a kid!! But it is true, it's considered a bad movie nowadays and I'm not really sure why. It feels like an arbitrary decision.

I think every big franchise or company goes through a slump at some point. Certain genres also feel it too.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe was a novelty idea at first, but with everyone else now trying to copy their formula and with Marvel Studios being at the point where they don't have to try anymore with their films (which is why I thought 2017 was a bit underwhelming for superhero films particularly Marvel ones.), their flaws are becoming apparent even to the casual audience which is why I'm hoping Infinity War will really shake the MCU to its core.

I loved Coco!!!
I am not so sure but maybe I feel it closer home because I am latin? I mean even my dad cried after they sang Remember me!!

I don't think they ran out of ideas but I do know it take years to make a movie so I suppose it is fair to want to make more sequels in order to win more money.

PD: For me Toy Story 4 would be an error (I hope I am mistaken).