Are There Too Many Tear-Jerker Animated Movies?

[powerplantanimations]

I dunno, I watched Fantastic Mr. Fox and while that movie had some emotional moments, I wouldn't exactly call it sad. I was sorta shocked that it was a well-written comedy. Almost like a PG-13 movie that's PG.

I know people will bring up Minions or whatever bargain bin movies, but I'm talking about films that always get nominated for Oscars.

I feel like most companies have to do something sad to prove themselves... and then you have movies like Mr. Fox. I dunno, I could be wrong. This was just something that's been bugging me all morning and I wanted to see what people thought. Obviously there's nothing wrong with being sad, Mr. Fox was like the... I wanna say third film that was nominated for an Oscar that decided to be a pure comedy (Or at least, the one I watched)? The other two being Rango and Into the Spider-Verse (Spider-Verse has emotional moments, but I wouldn't call it sad sad like Coco... I could be wrong there tho... Rango was weird af).

We're not here to talk about Boss Baby and I'm not sure if Shrek or Jimmy Neutron count either since that was like the first animated Oscars and it felt like they were just grabbing whatever was big at the moment.

[NickRowler]

I think that is just Wes Anderson and the way he makes movies.

Tho, I feel since Up, Pixar has been a bit obsessed with the "sad moment" of their films.

[abigaillmartin]

I guess it’s Pixar’s signature feel yah know?

[powerplantanimations]

Yeah I guess that should probably be what this thread is about. Like sure, one could argue that it's been Pixar's signature, but Incredibles, Cars, Cars 2, and Ratatoullie didn't have sad moments. The original Toy Story had like this sardonic edge to it. Bug's Life I don't recall a heart wrenching moment.

Yeah you're right. I'm looking at all of the films and I think Turning Red may be be the only one that isn't sad but I mean... I haven't watched that one. I just hear people not bringing it up as "sad" or "emotional". Lightyear I'm really bummed they went the emotional route. Really wanted that movie to be a tounge-and-cheek "YEAAAAAAAAAH THIS IS A TOY COMMERCIAL AND WE KNOW IT!" romp (maybe have that be Disney be self aware with its business practices).

I feel like variation wouldn't hurt, it just feels like the writers are trying to prove that animation can be taken seriously.... by making you cry when there's other ways of doing it.

Saying it right now, despite me loving the message and the ending of Monster's University, it did NOT need to try that hard to get an emotional response.

[VibrantFox]

I always thought it might be a consequence of the way people view the medium, at least from an audience perspective. It seems like pulling teeth trying to get certain adults over a certain age , and honestly even some youths, raised in the mindset of animated films being this silly childish thing than as a story telling medium. Like the need for emotionally impactful scenes seems to be their way of trying to engage those audiences but even then it's still a tough sell.

I wont deny that certain companies, directors or writers do just have like...niches in their writing where they usually produce stories with tear jerker moments (it's like musicians who keep a certain tone in a lot of their music) but it'd be nice to see things that branch out.

i think as far as award nominations go, especially mainstream awards like the oscars, it's tough for nominations to really be fair coz some of them don't respect the medium either. meanwhile actual animation awards have more balanced categories and nominations and awards. it's a pain but hopefully people over time can get it together

[cherrystark]

Hot take, there aren't ENOUGH tear-jerker animated movies. Prince of Egypt, Iron Giant, Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Emperor's New Groove, Shrek, The Littlest Toaster, Toy Story 3, Kungfu Panda. I don't think a lot of animated movies have heart anymore. I loved the animated short Bao? (I think it was called) because the emotion was universal. UP was good but I think could have been a short. It looses emotion as the movie goes on.

Lilo and Stich is a masterpiece, not because Disney marketed it so well, is because it hits universal themes. The storytellers were simply telling a story, no agenda (I guess is the best term) behind it.

[darthmongoose]

I think the thing is, that when people pay like £15 to go to the Cinema, they're expecting value for money and stuff they wouldn't just see in a TV episode. They want to see things that are spectacular, they want plots with high stakes that affect the characters, they want characters that are well written they can empathise with, and they want to experience catharsis (an ancient Greek theatrical term for the release of strong emotions to cleansing effect) and to come out of the cinema like "...wow. THAT was a movie."

If I went to the cinema and it was just like... 90 minutes of inconsequential fluff like watching three episodes of a normal cartoon but maybe with better animation because the stakes are low and character development was kept pretty minimal, I'd probably be like "....why was this a movie?" If big things don't happen that create big stakes and big emotions, it's like... why is it a movie and not a short sitcom series on netflix?

And I think the people who fund movies, not just animated ones, but all movies, have the same mindset. If it's got the plot and stakes of a sitcom or a cartoon episode, and only leaves the same emotional impact as an average sitcom or cartoon episode it should be a TV show, not a movie with the kind of money a theatrical release involves or demanding £15 a ticket.

[clarissapattern]

I never think Lilo and Stitch gets enough love, so very happy to see you mentioning it as a masterpiece

[system]

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.