When new Pixar movies arrive, audiences usually expect the studio’s signature mix of heart, humor, and themes that resonate with viewers of all ages. But the creative process behind those polished final films can sometimes be far more complicated than it appears on screen. That seems to be the case with Elio, the studio’s sci-fi adventure released last year, which reportedly went through several story revisions during development. According to reports, those changes included removing an LGBTQ+ storyline. Now, we have a brutally honest explanation for that decision, according to Pete Docter.

Docter, the chief creative officer of Pixar, addressed the reasoning behind some of the creative decisions made during Elio’s production. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, he explained that the studio was mindful of how certain themes might land with families and younger viewers. As he put it:

As reported by the Los Angeles Times, around the time of the movie's release, Pixar removed LGBTQ+ representation from the movie during development after the project allegedly struggled during test screenings. The animated film follows an 11-year-old boy who is accidentally mistaken for Earth’s official ambassador and transported to an intergalactic organization known as the Communiverse. While the premise remained intact, several character details reportedly changed significantly before the film reached theaters.

Trouble for the film’s original direction reportedly began during a 2023 test screening in Arizona. Per reports, audience members were asked at the end of the screening whether they would pay to see the film in theaters. The response, or lack of one, raised concerns among studio executives about how the movie was landing with viewers.

Following additional internal screenings, Pixar leadership began making adjustments to the project. At the time, Adrian Molina, who originally directed the film and had previously co-directed Coco, was leading the creative vision. Molina, who is openly gay, was reportedly given the option to continue co-directing after the studio expanded the leadership team. Eventually, however, Molina chose to step away from the project as the film began to move in a different creative direction.

New directors were brought in to guide the film forward, including Madeline Sharafian and Domee Shi, the filmmaker behind Turning Red. Some of the adjustments reportedly included removing visual details that hinted at Elio’s identity and personality in earlier versions of the film. For example, scenes that showed the character wearing a pink tank top made from beach litter and images in his bedroom suggesting a male crush were cut from the final version.

According to people who worked on the project, executives also pushed for changes to make the central character feel more traditionally “masculine.” Those creative shifts reportedly caused tension within the studio, and some members of the production team chose to leave the project after the film’s direction changed. The film also saw changes in its voice cast and character structure. America Ferrera was originally attached to voice Elio’s mother, but after Molina’s departure, the character was rewritten as the boy’s aunt and ultimately voiced by Zoe Saldaña.

Despite the behind-the-scenes changes, Elio ultimately reached theaters with a solid critical reception, holding an 83% critics’ score on Rotten Tomatoes and an even more impressive 89% audience score. However, its theatrical debut proved challenging, with the film posting one of Pixar’s lowest domestic openings.

It’s been a while since the animation studio enjoyed the kind of dominant run it had in the late ’90s and early 2000s, when hit after hit defined the brand. In discussing the studio’s approach, Docter has emphasized that Pixar’s primary goal is to tell stories that resonate with the widest possible audience. That philosophy may help explain some of the creative decisions made during Elio’s development.

You can currently stream Elio, along with the rest of Pixar’s catalog, with a Disney+ subscription. Meanwhile, the studio’s latest theatrical release, Hoppers, just hit theaters amid the 2026 movie schedule, so check your local listings if you’re planning a trip to the theater. Early critical response to Hoppers has been overwhelmingly positive, and the film is already approaching a milestone the studio hasn’t reached since 2017’s Coco.

Even before the 2025 movie schedule saw Pixar muddle through Elio’s not-so-stellar opening weekend, the storied Disney brand has found itself with a bit of a problem. Mainly, the company that innovated with films like Toy Story and The Incredibles seems to be able to keep those brands afloat, but can’t seem to get any original pictures to have that same success. But leave it to chief creative officer and long time Pixar stalwart Pete Docter to address the question of why that’s so, in a way that’s truly on brand.

On hand for the Most Innovative Companies Summit held by the publication FastCompany, Docter acknowledged ; shortly before Elio’s record low opening that the seas have been choppy. The director who helped make original concepts like Up and Inside Out into blockbuster hits provided his take on what’s happened, as you’ll read in part of Pete Docter’s remarks:

It may seem like a pretty simple answer, which contains the Pixar mission statement that’s driven the company since day one. But when comparing the animated market from Toy Story's 1995 debut to its current state, where the classic is seen as a Disney+ subscription mainstay, and the conditions are vastly different.

Most importantly, the competition from both domestic rivals DreamWorks Animation, as well as more plentiful access to animated features and series from across the globe, have diversified the pool. An odd sort of reminder of that fact has been occupying space at the multiplex, as How to Train Your Dragon’s live-action remake entered its second weekend at #1, with Elio’s year-long delay seeing it clock in with a 3rd place finish.

So where does Pixar go from here? Is it simply a matter of time before Toy Story 5 is broken up into a new trilogy in the name of solvency? Well, that’s not exactly what Pete Docter would do. If anything, the Soul co-director’s approach is pretty much the same thing the company would do on any other day:

Again, we see a paradoxical statement that seems so simple, but requires a lot of thought. Ultimately, box office success or not, that’s what’s kept Pixar movies in the spotlight. While some may not have taken to Lightyear’s bold approach to re-spinning its Toy Story hero, others (myself included) had a ball with it.

That’s because while the marketing might get muddled or the audience might be semi-conditioned to wait for Disney+ to see these future streaming hits, Pixar movies are still fun. They are, as Pete Docter put it, led by the creatives that make them. It’s just a question of trying to map up the talents of the bullpen with the wants and tastes of the audience at large.

So if you’ve been meaning to give this animated romp a shot, or even if you’re just merely upset that another original concept seems to have faltered, you have a clear assignment awaiting you. Go see Elio in theaters and throw your support to a film that could, if it plays its cards right, become the next Elemental-style success story.

I was in the audience at D23 last summer when Pixar CCO Pete Docter confirmed that Brad Bird was already at work developing Incredibles 3. There was, unsurprisingly, a lot of applause following that announcement. The Incredibles is one of Pixar’s most beloved films. Incredibles 2 was the top-grossing Pixar movie ever made until Inside Out 2 dethroned it last summer.

I like both Incredibles films, but I have to admit I wasn’t overwhelmed with excitement that Incredibles 3 was on the way. There was no reason to believe it wouldn’t be a solid film, but I just found it less interesting than doing something new or even making a sequel to a film that hadn’t already received one. But now I’m a bit more curious about Incredibles 3 because it will be different from the previous films in a big way.

Brad Bird Will Not Direct The Next Incredibles Movie

Today, THR broke the news that while Brad Bird will write and produce Incredibles 3, he will not direct the movie, as he had done with each of the previous Incredibles franchise entries. Instead, directing duties will be handled by Peter Sohn, who most recently directed Pixar’s Elemental.

While it had been widely assumed that Bird would direct the movie, it had never been specifically stated by Pixar. Perhaps that had even been the plan at one point. Bird does have other projects he’s directing, including Ray Gunn for Netflix. It’s possible Bird just didn’t have the time in his schedule. Bird and Docter reportedly jointly selected Sohn as the man who should direct the new film.

Peter Sohn Is The Perfect Choice To Helm Incredibles 3

But now you have my attention. My love for Elemental is well known to frequent CinemaBlend readers. I think it’s the best movie Pixar has made in a long time. Pixar has always been good at turning things without consciousness into living things that we care about and cry over. But in Elemental, we saw those characters fall in love, and the movie let a single relationship carry the weight of the entire story.

If Peter Sohn can do that with fire and water, then I have high hopes that he can do even more with characters that are actually human. It might be just enough of a different vibe to an Incredibles movie that it feels unique and not simply like it’s another of the same movie for the third time.

Fans of Brad Bird need not worry. He’s still writing the film, so one assumes the final script, the plot, the dialogue, etc, will be mostly his work. It will still be Bird’s story, and Sohn has been one of his long-time collaborator. Sohn began his professional career as an animator on The Iron Giant and has contributed to every film Bird has made for Pixar, including both previous Incredibles movies. If there's another person capable of bringing Brad Bird's work to life properly, it's probably Peter Sohn.

The fact that a director has been slotted indicates that Incredibles 3 is probably getting ready to shift into more of a production status, though the movie is probably at least a couple of years away at least. Still, I’m looking forward to when that day comes more now than I was before.

Just when we thought that Toy Story 4 would be the last movie of the franchise, Disney announced in 2023 that a fifth movie was on the way. Fortunately, this means our favorite “child’s play things” will make a comeback in making audiences laugh and cry. While Toy Story 5 already has the intriguing premise of the toys going up against the surge of technology, Pixar boss Pete Docter revealed another way it’ll (thankfully) stand out among other kids-centric flicks.

After the first Toy Story came out, there have been many other kids movies that families love, like The Incredibles, The LEGO Movie, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse and more. However, one thing you can agree about these action-packed animated films is that they’re so fast-paced, the story just flies on by. Pixar co-chief creative officer Pete Docter told THR he’s well aware of this swift-paced trend:

Pete Docter makes a great point that classic Disney movies moved at a much slower pace. If you look back at Disney classics found on your Disney+ subscription, Bambi took its sweet time to show the deer’s growth from a faun to an adult. Many scenes have little to no dialogue, with Bambi exploring nature and experiencing the changing of seasons in a realistic, peaceful environment.

The same could be said with the great animated flick Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, where we get long, quiet scenes of the Disney Princess interacting with animals, or the Evil Witch’s slow transformation into a disguised old woman. Slow-paced moments like these generate suspense, emotion and time to get to know the characters.

While a quick-paced movie can help audiences stay awake, the balance of action, emotion and storytelling depth is what will keep Pixar fans engaged. Thankfully, Pete Docter says we don’t have to worry about Toy Story 5 having a speedy pace:

That’s a relief to know. I'm personally not a fan of a movie ending so quickly just as I'm immersed in it. I'd rather a story be told at a gradual pace to fully absorb the characters and intriguing world compared to a film finishing within the snap of a finger.

The Toy Story movies have really come a long way since the original. The Pixar movie beautifully defied the formula by being the first full-length CGI movie. Its animation changed over the course of 24 years, with realistic textures and details, like the depiction of rain and fire. The inclusion of new characters has also made each movie better developed, like Jessie, the Yodelin’ Cowgirl who’s afraid of abandonment, and Forky, the homemade toy trying to find purpose. Each movie packs a powerful punch to the heart, as Pixar is known for, and I’m sure Toy Story 5 will continue luring audiences to an emotional rollercoaster.

Among all of the fast-paced kid movies out there, it’s nice to know that Toy Story 5 will delight audiences by not rushing the story and allowing us to let “moments breathe.” By taking its time to develop the franchise’s signature characters and the emotional weight of the story, it’ll be a good break from the frantic energy many modern animated movies have been bringing out. Make sure to watch Toy Story 5 in theaters on June 19, 2026.

When it comes to every Pixar movie that's been produced in the past 30 years, there are plenty of great titles. Yes, I like the newer films, and I'm looking forward to upcoming flicks, including Elio, which hits theaters this summer. However, there’s just something about the classics that just really hit for me. Monsters, Inc. is one of those films of my childhood that will always have a special place in my heart. I think the 2001 movie is pretty much perfect and, apparently, its ending was originally a bit different. Let’s get into it.

I Had No Idea The Monsters Inc. Ending Could Have Changed

Pete Docter currently serves as the chief creative officer of Pixar and has held that post since 2018. Aside from his career as an exec, Docter has also directed some of the company's best films, including Monsters. When the filmmaker spoke on the Kelly Corrigan Wonders podcast about his history with the animation company, he shared this detail about the making of his 2001 movie:

Of course, it’s hard to forget the moment in the Pixar film when Mike surprises his best friend, Sulley, with a reconstructed version of Boo’s door, allowing him to visit the adorable little, human girl he formed a father daughter-like bond with. However, as the ending was in the screening and remain in the theatrical version, the movie concludes with Sulley smiling as he walks into her room, before a fade to black. As Docter continued on the podcast:

Now, the director could have listened to the audience and crafted a longer ending where Sulley and Boo get to reunite and we see them together in the final frame. And, after the audience screening, it sounds like the studio may have preferred he change the ending. However, Pete Docter stood his ground and kept the final scene how he wanted it, which is admirable.

I Think The Movie Ended Perfectly, So I'm So Happy The 'Fight' Was Won

Of course, when I was a kid, I remember wishing I could see the reunion myself as well. But, through my multiple rewatches of the movie, I think it’s one of the best Pixar endings ever. There’s a bittersweet quality to the scene that allows the audience to imagine Sulley and Boo’s reunion in a way that activates our imagination. That kind of filmmaking like that doesn’t spoon feed its audience is rather rare, and it's really beautiful when pulled off.

It’s especially lovely to reflect on the Oscar-nominated film's ending following our first look at the Monsters, Inc. ride opening in Walt Disney World soon. Even though it's sadly replacing another beloved attraction, imagineers are set to break ground on the ride this summer. Now, I want to watch the movie all over again and have a good cry over its powerful ending.

There’s always a slew of exciting upcoming Disney movies to look forward to, but I always have a soft spot for what’s next from Pixar Animation Studios. Following Inside Out 2 becoming the highest grossing movie of 2024, I’m expecting great things from the studio going forward. That said, it’s definitely interesting to hear Pixar’s chief creative officer Pete Docter share new comments on recent movies going to Disney+ and flopping at the box office.

Pixar Boss Talks About Sending A Ton Of Films Straight To Disney+

From 2020 to 2022, Pixar ditched having its films go to theaters altogether and they were released for those with a Disney+ subscription to enjoy right away from home. That meant fans like me didn’t get the chance to see Soul, Luca and Turning Red in theaters. Here’s what Pete Docter recently said about Pixar’s former strategy while speaking to IndieWire:

After having quite a few sequels, Pixar went back to making original movies based on original concepts with these three titles, but with theaters in disarray during the COVID-19 pandemic, the decision was made to make them at-home releases. While reflecting on the releases, Docter talked about how these movies missing theaters definitely kept them from becoming pop culture touchstones like some of the studio’s other films in the past. It’s certainly a shame considering we decided Soul is the best of Pixar movies ever made.

But I Want To Talk About His Solid Take On Why Lightyear Flopped

Following Pixar’s era of being Disney+ movies rather than theatrical events, the studio’s next movies back at cinemas, was a flop. Toy Story spinoff Lightyear suffered a reported $106 million loss when it made just $226 million at the worldwide box office. While it sounds like Pixar was surprised when it wasn’t a hit with audiences, I think Docter’s thoughts on why it didn’t do well in theaters has some merit. Here’s what he had to say:

While audiences absolutely love Buzz Lightyear from the Toy Story movies, it’s true Pixar didn’t really give us the same beloved character with Lightyear. Rather than it being Tim Allen’s toy character in his own movie, it was a more serious sci-fi action version of the character voiced by Chris Evans. Following the movie’s release, there’s a share of Lightyear apologists who have defended the movie, but overall, it just didn’t hit the same as the Toy Story films.

Sadly, I’m wondering if Inside Out 2’s massive success and the so-so reactions to more original Pixar films means that the studio will take safer swings in the future (such as the Toy Story 5 release date already being on the way). I really hope the animation studio continues to use its imagination, because while Lightyear did feel like a weak attempt at a spinoff to me, it also came from an interesting and original place in some ways as well.

Pixar struck gold again earlier this year with Kelsey Mann's Inside Out 2, a film that raked in $1.6 billion worldwide, blowing past the previous 2024 box office champs, Dune: Part Two and even breaking Top Gun: Maverick’s impressive milestone, making it one of the most successful animated movies of all time. While the film's success should have put everyone at ease at the animation studio, Pixar boss (and director of the original movie) Pete Docter feels anything but relaxed. As Pixar’s Chief Creative Officer and a key architect behind some of the most beloved and best Pixar movies, Docter’s concerns extend far beyond box office numbers. Despite Inside Out 2’s stellar performance, the Monsters Inc. director is worried about the future of cinema itself.

In a recent chat with The Ankler, the Pixar helmer didn’t hold back when talking about the uncertain future of the film industry. Despite the massive success of IO2, the Soul filmmaker quickly acknowledged that the landscape feels anything but stable. In his words:

Although it might surprise some to hear this coming from Pixar's head honcho, it makes sense when you think about it. The rise of some of the best streaming services, the rapid advancements of artificial intelligence, and shifting audience habits are changing the rules of the game entirely. These seismic shifts bring a fair amount of anxiety for the creative leader.

One of the major wild cards in all of this? AI. Now, it’s not like Pixar is a stranger to AI. The studio has been using the tech for years to enhance their films. But for Pete, the conversation around AI in animation is far from straightforward. Sure, AI can be useful, but it’s not without its pitfalls, especially when maintaining creative integrity. Pete explained:

Docter isn’t only worried about the technical side of AI but also about the bigger, more philosophical questions. What happens when machines start taking over the very thing humans have done for thousands of years—telling stories? For a storyteller like the veteran animation director, it’s a future that feels a bit unsettling.

But AI isn’t the only thing keeping him up at night. Like many companies, the post-pandemic world has left Pixar grappling with how to maintain that old magic in an era where remote work is the norm. The Up filmmaker firmly believes in the power of spontaneous, face-to-face collaboration — the kind of moments that can only happen when you bump into a colleague in a hallway. He explained:

Even though Inside Out 2 proves Pixar can still churn out box office hits, Pete Docter’s eyes are firmly fixed on the challenges ahead. Kesley Mann's movie may have been a resounding success, but even a billion-dollar hit doesn’t bring peace of mind in the rapidly evolving world of cinema.

With several highly anticipated upcoming Pixar films on the list of upcoming Disney movies, like Elio, Hoppers, and the already buzzworthy Toy Story 5, the animation visionary is more than aware of the challenges that lie ahead. Toy Story 5, in particular, has already sparked plenty of conversation — and not all of it positive. But Docter has addressed fan concerns head-on, explaining that the team is taking a thoughtful approach to the beloved franchise’s next chapter.

In the meantime, Pixar fans don’t have to wait for those new releases to get their fix. With a Disney+ subscription, you can dive back into Pixar’s impressive catalog.

Disney has found a great deal of success with all its live-action remakes over the last few years. There are several more on the schedule of upcoming Disney movies. The trend shows no signs of stopping, which has caused some to wonder if we might see Pixar films get similar treatment at some point. There has even been a fan campaign to try and get a live-action version of Ratatouille, one of the best Pixar movies, made for actor Josh O’Connor, who is a massive fan of the film. Unfortunately for those fans, Pixar’s Chief Creative Officer has little interest in remaking their films. 

In a recent interview with Time, Pete Docter learned of Challengers star Josh O’Conner’s near-obsession with Ratatouille and the campaign for the remake. When asked what he thought of the idea, Doctor admitted that he doesn’t care for the practice of remaking animated films as live-action. The Pixar chief said…

It certainly might bite him in the butt. Docter doesn’t just say that he’s not planning on doing remakes, but he indicates he doesn’t like the practice of what Disney has been doing with its own animation catalog, saying it “bothers” him. Disney might not love to hear one of their executives saying that, though the fact that he’s willing to do so certainly indicates there have been no discussions of remakes at Pixar. 

Of course, a remake of Ratatouille would have a lot of its own problems. Not the least of which, as Time points out, is that making a CGI rat character that looked like a realistic rat wouldn’t exactly make it the cute and fun character that Remy was in the movie. Docter agrees that making Remy work in a live-action setting would be quite difficult, saying…  

We’ve actually seen evidence of this in Disney's own live-action remakes. The recent The Little Mermaid remake, while it had a lot going for it, weirded out many on social media when we saw what Flounder and Sebastian were going to look like as realistic creatures. It was something about The Little Mermaid that worried me back when the project was announced, and I turned out to be right.

So if you were actually hoping for a Ratatouille live-action movie, or were hoping that Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt would reunite to play Buzz and Woody, you’re out of luck. But don’t worry too much, as there are still plenty of upcoming Disney remakes to enjoy.

Since before Walt Disney released Steamboat Willie, there have been people arguing that animation is a medium primarily for children, and there have been those trying to eliminate the notion that animation is only for kids. Those of us who have grown up with the work of Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar not only realize that animation works for adults, but we know that what we loved about it as children, and what it means to us as adults, are very different things.

Animation isn’t only for kids, but there’s no argument that kids love animation. Pete Docter, Pixar’s CCO understands that his movies are not just for kids, but he also understands that what kids get from animation is different than what adults get from it. Speaking with THR, Docter related an adorable, and also hilarious story, about speaking to a kid who had just seen Up, and found part of the movie quite sad, but not for the reason you think. Docter explained…

A lot of people would put the “Married Life” sequence in Up, which makes up the first few minutes, among the most emotionally devastating in cinema, not simply animation. Ellie’s death is one of those moments you can just bring up without context and people will understand, and possibly begin to weep involuntarily.

And yet, this kid just felt bad when Kevin hurt her leg. Honestly, I get it. I’m a father to a six-year-old who gets emotional at movies a lot, as we both did with Pixar's recent hit Elemental. While I’m occasionally able to properly prepare her for a sad scene if it’s a movie I’ve seen before, sometimes the thing that sets her off is something I never realized would mean so much to her.

But at some point, that kid is going to watch Up again and have a very different reaction to those first few minutes, and that’s wonderful. Some of the best things about movies are the way we can watch them again and again, and get something new from them each time. That often comes from the way each of us changes over time, whether that’s simply getting older, and allegedly wiser, or learning something new that causes us to respond differently.

I would argue that many Pixar movies really aren't made for kids all that much. As I discussed in my Elemental review, that movie being a simple romantic character drama may not resonate with little kids the way other Pixar movies do, it's a story that, while it's not too mature for them, just may not interest younger viewers as much.

The key is that animation is not a genre, and it's not just for kids. Animation can tell any story for any audience, even if those different audiences take very different messages away from it. 

When the third Toy Story movie was released, many assumed it would be the conclusion of the series, as it saw Woody, Buzz, and the rest of the gang gifted to young Bonnie when Andy went off to college. But later, co-writer Andrew Stanton said it was never meant to be the final movie and, in 2019, a fourth flick was released. In recent weeks, it was announced that Toy Story 5 is on the way, and some fans have seemingly lashed out at the decision to release another installment. Now, amid the backlash, Pixar boss Pete Docter is sharing thoughts on his general approach to sequels and teased what audiences can expect from the upcoming sequel in the toy saga.

I don't think many would've expected that nearly 30 years after the release of the first Toy Story movie, we'd still be getting further entries in the franchise, but here we are. And as it turns out, the creatives at Pixar weren't so sure, either. Pete Docter, who's currently the company's CCO, explained to The Wrap that he honestly had no idea what the infinity and beyond future would look like for the franchise:

So based on those comments, it sounds like the path for the beloved film series has been somewhat fluid, and that's worked out in the company's favor. Though that success still doesn't shield it from backlash. When it was confirmed that Disney had given the green light to Toy Story 5, the Internet had a lot of negative thoughts about it. Some believe this series of toy-centered films should have ended after the third movie. Another made the point that viewers can't take many more emotional conclusions. The sentimental ending of Toy Story 4 had Woody parting ways with his longtime friends in order to pursue a new life with Bo Peep. But with a fifth movie on the way, it's likely that the toys will somehow reunite.

Given that it's early days, Pete Docter didn't offer up too many details on the upcoming installment. Though based on the little that he did share, it sounds like audiences are in for something fresh:

There's no way to tell what (or who) exactly the filmmaker is referring to with those comments. Maybe fans will see some impressive new characters. After all, Toy Story 2 introduced us to Jessie the roping cowgirl and Bullseye, the faithful toy horse that was part of the classic Woody's Roundup show. The third movie brought in  Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear as well as Barbie’s eventual beau, Ken. And as for the fourth flick, we can’t forget Forky, who taught us that not all toys have to be bought in a store. 

Amidst the backlash, it’s important to remember that the latest Toy Story movie still drew a crowd and became the eighth highest-grossing box office of 2019, earning critical acclaim as well. Toy Story 5 could also end up being an instant classic, but we'll just have to wait and see what Pete Docter and co. have in store. In the meantime, you can watch all four of the movies now using a Disney+ subscription. 

Unlike Pixar’s first 2022 movie, Turning Red, Lightyear, the Toy Story spinoff, was sent to theaters first rather than delivered exclusively to Disney+ subscribers right off the bat. Unfortunately, the cinematic tale chronicling the origin story of the sci-fi character that the Tim Allen-voiced toy was based off of failed to make a splash either critically and commercially. Pete Docter, one of Lightyear’s executive producers and a key figure at Pixar, has now opened up about where things went wrong with the Chris Evans-led flick.

Review-wise, Lightyear was met with a decent amount of positive reception, but it soon became clear this wouldn’t be one of Pixar’s most exceptional theatrical offerings. Conversely, Lightyear only made a little over $226 million worldwide off a reported $200 million budget, rendering it a box office bomb. While chatting with The Wrap, Pete Docter shared his take on why Lightyear failed to connect with audiences, saying:

The name Buzz Lightyear has been tied with the Toy Story franchise for nearly three decades now, so Pete Docter speculation that the general public was confused by Lightyear doesn’t sound implausible. Between this Buzz Lightyear operating in a sci-fi world surrounded by new faces besides Emperor Zurg (who ended by being an older Buzz from an alternate timeline), as well as Chris Evans voicing the character rather than Tim Allen, there were enough elements at play to produce confusion. Plus, as Docter noted, the design of Buzz himself and the supporting cast of characters was a sharp contrast to how people have seen the toy version of Buzz and his cohorts have been depicted since 1995.

So Lightyear won’t go down in Pixar history as one of its hits, and while Pete Docter acknowledged that the movie that was made failed to meet the expectations of what many people thought it would be, he also expressed his admiration for the product that director and co-writer Angus MacLane made. In his words:

Angus MacLane crafted the Lightyear story with Matthew Aldrich and Jason Headley, with the latter writing the script alongside the director. Chris Evans costars on the movie included Keke Palmer, Peter Sohn, Taika Waititi, Dale Soules, Uzo Aduba, Isaiah Whitlock Jr. and James Brolin. While Evans has shared his “selfish” reasons for wanting Lightyear 2 to happen, given the way this first movie performed, it’s probably safe to say the chances of that happening are slim.

Still, if you’re among Lightyear’s supporters, the movie is easily available to watch on Disney+ and/or acquire on home media. You can also read through the quick things we know about Pixar’s next movie, Elemental, which comes out on June 16 and dropped its first trailer last November.

One of the greatest things about Pixar is the company's willingness to take big swings when it comes to creative ideas, and develop stories that nobody else on Earth is telling. This has led them to have incredible success over the last 25 years, but there is a side effect of that approach that can be summed up in one word: questions. Its fascinating to peer into the lives of toys when humans aren't around, and discover why it is that monsters scare children, but there are always lingering details that can leave fans scratching their heads. There is, however, a really simple answer for why this is: there is only so much information about a broader world that can be packed into a standard-length feature film, and only so much that is needed to tell a proper story.

Pixar's latest, Soul (which just landed on Disney+ this past weekend), is another movie that is guaranteed to be parsed and examined by fans for years to come, generating questions that the film itself doesn't address in its 100 minute runtime, and director Pete Docter recently discussed this common occurrence during an interview with The Huffington Post. The filmmaker (who is also presently the chief creative officer of the animation company) spoke specifically to common queries about Toy Story and Monsters Inc., and while talking about an example from the former he got to the heart of the matter:

At the end of the day, Buzz Lightyear freezes when he's around humans because that's something that needs to happen so that the story can function as planned. As intimated by Pete Docter, who was on the original story team of Toy Story, a person can come up with any number of explanations for why it happens (maybe it's a toy instinct thing?), but at the end of the day it's not really something that matters because it's not something that the audience is thinking about or focusing on as the story plays out.

Another example addressed by Pete Docter came from his feature directorial debut, Monsters, Inc. Have you ever wondered what was going on with Boo's parents while the young girl was hanging out with Sully and Mike in Monstropolis? Well, you'll be happy to know that the folks at Pixar also thought about that during the making of the movie, and that it was actually almost directly addressed – but the reason it wasn't is because it didn't fit with the flow of the film. Said Docter,

Ultimately it's just one of those gaps that audiences are expected to fill in themselves – which, when you think about it, is something that comes with the experience of watching every movie.

At the end of the day, part of the challenge of making a Pixar film that engages in whole new worlds and ideas never before explored is just making sure that the audience is being provided with all of the information that is necessary to understand the story. Pete Docter explained in brief,

One would certainly have a hard time arguing with the success that Pixar has had with that approach, and that very much extends to their latest release. Soul – which is one of the best films released in 2020 and is an absolute must-see – is now available for your viewing pleasure exclusively on Disney+.

When going into a Pixar movie, there are several elements one should expect – beautiful animation, humor and a cameo from John Ratzenberger. The veteran actor has been with the animation studio since its debut film, Toy Story, in which he voiced sarcastic piggy bank Hamm. So many were surprised when it appeared that Ratzenberger was not featured in Pixar’s latest film, Soul. However, director Pete Docter has commented on the matter, and it seems this actually isn’t the case.

John Ratzenberger has a very distinct voice that any Pixar fan can recognize, so it was quite unusual to seemingly not hear him among Soul’s all-star voice talent. When CinemaBlend’s Sean O’Connell had a chance to speak with director Pete Docter, he revealed that Ratzenberger actually did have a cameo in the film, but the filmmaker remained mum on the details:

That mysterious answer from Pete Docter is sure to get everyone wondering where John Ratzenberger might have popped up. Though there are a number of possibilities, as the film takes viewers to a number of different places. My personal guess would be that he voiced someone in the “Great Before,” as it featured numerous characters with different voices. And because Ratzenberger didn’t seem to be immediately recognizable, he may have intentionally used a different voice for the part.

While Ratzenberger’s Pixar roles have varied in length, they’re almost always memorable. Many can probably remember the first time they heard his loud and humorously arrogant performance as P.T Flea in A Bug’s Life or when he memorably showed up at the tail end of The Incredibles, playing the villainous Underminer, a role he even reprised for the 2018 sequel.

Pixar knows people have come to expect John Ratzenberger to show up in its films at this point, and the studio has even poked fun at itself for reusing him. During the end credits of Cars, Mack the truck (a character voiced by Ratzenberger) watches several parodies of Pixar films at a drive-in theater and eventually notices that certain characters are voiced by the same actor (the actor being him, of course).

Despite having been with the studio for so long, John Ratzenberger isn’t breaking with them yet. He’ll next be heard in Disney+’s Monsters Inc. spinoff show, Monsters at Work. The show will see Ratzenberger reprise his role as the boisterous and banished Abominable Snowman.

John Ratzenberger has definitely become beloved by Pixar fans for his many performances and, after hearing Pete Docter’s comments, they now have another great reason to rewatch the largely well-received Soul. We’ll see how long it takes for someone to find out where the actor was featured.

Soul is now available to stream on Disney+.

Soul wants you to stop and think about how you are living your life. How many movies aspire to that ambitious ask? Very few. Even less succeed in making you do so. That’s part of what makes this animated masterpiece so special. Director Pete Docter has been warming up for this type of thorough, invasive, spirit-testing, head-to-toe self-examination of our time spent on this floating rock. Think about some of the small (but pivotal) questions he snuck into his previous Pixar adventures. Could Carl, the protagonist in Up, accept a life with his soulmate, Ellie? Would Inside Out’s Riley ever get comfortable in her family’s new home city? If we aren’t wrestling with these issues, we overlook them. The magic of Doctor is that he understands how enormous the problems can be.

Soul is his biggest swing yet, and he connects with full force on every level. The beautiful, spiritual, amusing, inspiring and life-affirming ode to our pursuit of purpose introduces two incredibly memorable Pixar leads from wildly different realms, and sets them on a course that will, again, cause you to pause and think about what you have done in life, what else you want to do, and whether you are making the right choices to get there. It’s vintage Pixar, and is guaranteed to be one of this year’s greatest films.

Soul takes us someplace truly remarkable: The afterlife.

We have seen death in Pixar films before. I mentioned Pete Docter’s Up, and the opening montage is a heartbreaking ode to a love, and a life, lived to its fullest. Soul is different. The central story of Soul really can’t begin until the main character, middle-school band instructor Joe Gardner (Jamie Foxx), dies.

It’s dark, but it’s essential. Joe dies on the day that the struggling jazz musician finally gets his first real break at a genuine gig. He “wakes up” as a soul in The Great Unknown, and then tries to move Heaven in order to somehow get back to Earth. It’s a terrific concept, and one that frees Docter and his animation team to playfully create anything they want in the ethereal afterlife. The rules fly by Joe (and us) at a rapid clip. Souls in limbo have no senses, so pizza slices have no taste or smell. (Sounds like Hell.) Pirate-inspired souls congregate in the corners of the afterlife, even though they are still attached to bodies. Their human forms can “zone out,” a concept Joe explores through music in Soul’s most breathtaking scene.

And Joe receives a mission. He has to be a mentor. And Pixar gives us one of its greatest characters ever in 22 (Tina Fey).

Soul’s two main characters are flawed, fascinating studies.

After personifying emotions in the illuminating Inside Out, Pete Docter figures out how to present a soul, introducing the concept of souls in a realm called The Great Before. It’s genius. Here, souls are prepared to be sent to Earth once they figure out the one thing that makes them special, or gives them purpose. Joe immediately assumes that his “purpose” involves music. Before he can prove that, he’s tasked with helping a lost soul named 22 (Fey), who never figured out her calling despite help from a litany of famous, deceased mentors.

It’s a familiar trope: Two characters with complications who must work together to solve their problems and achieve their stated goals. But it’s the weight of the issues plaguing Joe and 22 that elevate Soul to levels not yet achieved by Pixar. This is metaphysical, soul-searching material that will reach deep into our own identities and turn a mirror back on us, forcing us to reflect. 22, for example, not only can’t find her “spark” (the thing that gives her purpose), she’s addled with the negativity that comes from mentors telling her she’s not good enough, and she’ll never be good enough. Joe, meanwhile, has been chasing a dream, sacrificing basically everything else in his life to attain it. But what if his dream is wrong, and the goal he’s been chasing isn’t really the right one? When do you stop chasing? When is it the right time to pivot?

There are no easy answers to these questions, and Soul has few solutions to the massive questions it raises. But you appreciate the journey both of the main characters take, and understand the detours they follow to reach their conclusions. 22, in particular, is one of the most rewarding characters in Pixar’s stable, an inimitable sprite who’s tough to peg because she’s aloof, misguided, indifferent but desperately in need of guidance. Watching her evolve has been the most entertaining parts of my Soul rewatches.

Pixar made Soul for parents.

The verdict leveled at most Pixar movies is that they are made for kids, but there’s plenty of material – both humorous and intelligent – to appeal to the parents in the audience. Soul, on the other hand, seems like it’s destined to fly so far over the heads of adolescent audience members that I’m certain the movie wasn’t made for them.

That’s not to say there isn’t a wealth of visual artistry and humorous physical comedy at play in Soul. Kids will be entertained. But they can’t possibly understand the existential crossroads both Joe and 22 stand at, with each wondering if they’ve lived wasted lives, or if they’ve placed importance on the wrong aspects of living. These are lessons that only a person who’s actually lived can best appreciate, so at least they will be there, waiting for younger audiences as they grow and learn what Docter has achieved here.

Soul pours out of the heart and mind of a creator who has spent ample amounts of time contemplating the value of the day to day, and minute to minute, moments that make up existence. I appreciate how much this film helps me to appreciate those beats more, because of it.

Over the course of its nearly 25-year run, the bulk of Pixar Animation Studios beloved and iconic films have been created by a small handful of filmmakers. This dream team of directors including Brad Bird, Lee Unkrich, Pete Docter, Andrew Stanton and formerly John Lasseter has delivered classics from Toy Story to Wall-E to The Incredibles to Inside Out. Despite this impeccable track record, Pixar President Jim Morris has some blunt thoughts about what the future holds for some of Disney’s most popular directors.

While addressing the future of animation at the Mouse House in the decades to come, Jim Morris teased an impending change of the guard. Talking about the Pixar dream team, Jim Morris said:

Prior to John Lasseter’s exit from Pixar and Disney as a whole following claims of unwelcome sexual advances in the workplace, executives knew that its dream team was getting long in the tooth. According to Jim Morris, Pixar was already anticipating the change that was and is (eventually) inevitable. In his comments to Vulture, he made that clear, noting that the middle-aged men who have shepherded Pixar to this point are not going to be the ones at the wheel a decade from now.

In Jim Morris’ view, animated movies come from younger people, with their fingers on the pulse of storytelling and what’s in the zeitgeist. That is how it worked with filmmakers like Andrew Stanton, Lee Unkrich and Pete Docter, who is now the Chief Creative Officer of Pixar, and that is how it will work for the next generation of Pixar films, which will be directed by the next generation of Pixar filmmakers.

In a way Jim Morris’ blunt thoughts about these popular directors sound pretty harsh, like he’s hitting these successful filmmakers with an ‘OK boomer’ and sending them on their way. But it seems like he is more addressing the natural change that is inevitable and for which Pixar is preparing. It’s not to say these popular directors won’t be allowed to make a Pixar movie in 2029, just that they won’t be the directors at Pixar that are driving the studio forward.

They are getting older and some will have moved on. This natural turnover will result in Pixar making room to bring in newer, younger, diverse voices that can bring the kind of creative energy and originality to their films that the likes of Pete Docter, Brad Bird, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich brought to theirs.

To that end, Pixar, which has been known as a bit of a boys club, has diversified its ranks, bringing in more women to the studio’s creative team, resulting in a different Pixar than it used to be. The same sort of thing is happening at sister studio, Walt Disney Animation Studios, where Frozen II co-director Jennifer Lee has taken over as Chief Creative Officer.

Addressing what Jennifer Lee has brought to the table, Walt Disney Animation Studios president Clark Spencer also said:

Jennifer Lee delivered one of the most successful animated films of all time with Frozen and is poised to do so again with Frozen II. The first Frozen was her directorial debut and Disney reaped the rewards of taking a chance on relatively new talent with a different perspective. Now she is bringing that experience to her new role at the hallowed Walt Disney Animation Studios.

It seems that overall, Disney animation is looking to bring in new people, with different perspectives, to tell new stories. This is true not just true above the line, but with the animators as well. The SparkShorts series on Disney+ gives young animators a chance to break out by making shorts for the platform with limited budgets and time. The goal is to not only discover new talent, but also to also have a deep roster so that when somebody does age out, there will be a variety of new artists with new ideas ready to step up and fill that spot on the roster.

We are seeing some of this push for new things under Disney Animation with both Pixar and Walt Disney Animation Studios moving away from sequels and towards new original films in the coming years.

To see what’s headed to theaters next year from Pixar, Walt Disney Animation and every other studio, check out our 2020 Release Schedule.

Pixar, and its ever loyal animation partner Disney, have been kicking lately with the critically acclaimed Toy Story 4 and the announcement of its upcoming suburban fantasy Onward inciting mass anticipation. Most recently, they gave fans a taste of what else there is to come with the official announcement of Soul.

So far, there is very little known about Soul other than the very delicately designed title, and the film has been a mystery since IMDb had it listed only as an “Untitled Pixar Animation Project.” The plot synopsis that Disney and Pixar released with the announcement of the title barely answers any questions, either. More accurately, it just creates more questions.

As of right now, Soul is described by Disney and Pixar, via social media, as “a journey from the streets of New York City to the cosmic realms, discovering the answers to life's most important questions.” Even for a Pixar film, that is a highly ambitious, yet incredibly vague concept.

Regardless, as the case usually is with any movie from Disney and Pixar, I am very much anticipating Soul, mostly because I am curious to discover more about it. On that note, what do we know about Soul so far? Read on to find out.

When Was Soul First Announced?

Technically, Soul was first announced in early 2016 whilst Inside Out was up for Best Animated Feature at the Academy Awards. There was no mention of a title, plot details, characters, or anything of the like. All that was known was that an idea had been pitched at Pixar.

That was, until June 19, 2019, shortly before the release of Toy Story 4, when Pixar tweeted out this special message:

As you can see, we got the title (in an eye-catching art style, to boot), but still no hints at any notable characters and a very, very vaguely stated plot description. Mysteriously dense concept aside, the reveal of Soul had fans excited to see Pixar putting out more original content in the next year, having released two sequels in two years with Incredibles 2 in 2018 and Toy Story 4 the following year.

When Is The Release Date For Soul?

As you can see from the aforementioned tweet, Soul will be arriving in theaters on June 19, 2020. This will come exactly a year after the release date’s official announcement and a little more than three months after the Disney and Pixar release of Onward, featuring the voices of Tom Holland and Chris Pratt.

There is actually a fun fact associated with Soul’s release date. It will be coming out exactly five years after the release of 2015’s Inside Out, which also came out on June 19 that year.

Believe it or not, this is not the first time a Pixar movie has encountered such a coincidence. In fact, Soul will be the fourth Pixar film to be released the same day as a previous Pixar film.

The first instance of this curious phenomena occurred when The Good Dinosaur was released on November 25, exactly 17 after 1998’s A Bug’s Life. The other examples of this include Coco and the original Toy Story, both released on November 22 just 22 years apart, and, most recently, Toy Story 4 was released on June 21, 2019, the same day as 2013’s Monsters University.

Who Is Director Of Soul?

Pete Docter has served co-director on three previous Disney/Pixar classics: Monsters Inc., Up, and Inside Out. This time, Soul will be his first solo directorial effort on a full-length animated feature.

Pete Docter, born in Minnesota in 1968, has been an animator since even before joining Pixar. He released his first short film Winter in 1988, which he followed with Palm Springs and Next Door, all of which were hand drawn.

Pete Docter joined Pixar at 21 years old in 1990 (upon late Pixar veteran Joe Ranft’s recommendation to John Lasseter) with limited abilities and having little to no experience with computer animation. However, Docter was quickly assigned larger and larger roles in the company and even became one of the key creators behind the development of Toy Story, basing the character of Buzz Lightyear mostly on himself.

Soul comes from a story conceived by Pete Docter, but there is no confirmation of who is writing the script. However, when considering the premise as Disney and Pixar have presented it and that Docter was one of the minds behind Inside Out, I imagine we are in for a philosophical, emotionally resonant treat with this one.

There is still much more to know about Disney and Pixar’s Soul before it comes out June 19, 2020. Until then, be sure to check back with CinemaBlend for more updates.

While the last year has been great for Pixar Animation Studios on the theatrical side of things, as Cars 3, Coco and Incredibles 2 have all been successful at the box office, behind the scenes, the company has been going through some shakeups. Back in November, John Lasseter, the chief creative officer at both Pixar and Walt Disney Animation Studios, announced that he would be taking a six month-long leave of absence after acknowledging "missteps" with his employees. Then a little under two weeks ago, it was announced that Lasseter will leave Disney at the end of the year. Now his positions have been filled, only rather than have one person filling both roles again, two different people will be leading the charge at Pixar and Disney animation divisions, respectively.

Pete Docter will oversee things over at Pixar Animation Studios, while Jennifer Lee will take over as the head of Walt Disney Animation Studios. Docter's been part of Pixar since 1990, and his notable credits for the company include Monsters Inc., Up and Inside Out. As for Lee, her first project at Disney was writing Wreck-It Ralph, but she made an even bigger splash as the co-director of Frozen, working alongside Chris Buck. She also drafted the story for Zootopia and wrote A Wrinkle in Time, taking over from Jeff Stockwell. According to Variety, both Lee and Docter had been rumored to be in the running for their respective roles, and now it's official.

As far as Pixar goes, it sounds like there wasn't a better candidate to take over John Lasseter's job than Pete Docter. Having spent nearly 30 years at the studio and been around for the entirely of its feature filmmaking endeavors, Docter's played a key role in in the Pixar's success, so who better to lead it into a new era. From writing and directing to animating and even lending his voice to a few characters, the man is clearly talented across the board. Then looking at Jennifer Lee, with all she's accomplished at Walt Disney Animation Studios so far, as well as returning to direct Frozen 2 with Chris Buck, it sounds like she's also quite suited to take on Lasseter's former duties in that area of the Disney empire.

While John Lasseter was an important figure at Pixar for many years, it came to light last year that his professional behavior left a lot to be desired, namely as he'd been accused of behaving inappropriately towards female employees. Following his sabbatical, Lasseter will have a consulting role at Pixar and Disney until 2018 wraps up, but when it comes to the future of these studios, Pete Docter and Jennifer Lee will be guiding them forward.

The latest Pixar release, Incredibles 2, is off to a great start, having made nearly $260 million worldwide so far. Stay tuned to CinemaBlend on all the latest surrounding Pixar and Disney's animated projects.

Pixar's John Lasseter is the latest in a long line of entertainment executives who is stepping away from his job due to apparent misconduct. However, that leaves a hole at the top of a very important company. While Lasseter is only expected to take a six-month leave of absence, who will be running things at Pixar for the next six months? According to some rumors within Pixar, it appears that longtime Pixar vet Pete Docter will be the one taking over during Lasseter's absence.

Yesterday, it was revealed that John Lasseter would be taking a self-imposed leave of absence following what he characterized as "missteps" in regards to his behavior around some female employees. However, that leaves Pixar and Walt Disney Animation without a chief creative officer for at least that long, assuming that Lasseter returns to the job without incident next year. While no official replacement has been named, Vanity Fair reports that the rumor around Pixar is that Pete Docter will taking over Lasseter's responsibilities.

What's unclear is whether Pete Docter will be taking over all of John Lasseter's job, or just his responsibilities within Pixar. Lasseter was essentially in charge of everything involving animation within the entire Disney organization, leading to an era of impressive success within both the Disney and Pixar divisions of the company. It was a lot for one man to do, which means it's a lot for one man to take on.

Having said that, Pete Docter is certainly a solid choice if he going to be the interim creative head of Pixar. As much as John Lasseter has been given credit for the unprecedented success the company has seen over the last few years, the fact is that Pete Docter has been part of a lot of that success himself. He was a member of Pixar's original Brain Trust, alongside John Lasseter and other Pixar vets like Andrew Stanton. He directed Up, Inside Out and Monsters Inc. and was involved in writing numerous other Pixar classics like Wall-E and the first two Toy Story films. He's also credited as one of the story writers for the upcoming Toy Story 4.

Pete Docter's primary focus over the next six months will likely be grooming Incredibles 2 for release. The film is set to hit theaters in July, a couple months after John Lasseter returns, assuming he does so on time. Pixar's Coco hit theaters today, and Walt Disney Animation doesn't have a movie set for release until next November, with Ralph Breaks the Internet: Wreck-It Ralph 2.

The next six months will no doubt be an interesting period for Disney without John Lasseter, though, if he does return, the more interesting period could actually be what comes after.

Pixar’s big summer movie, Inside Out, was a huge success all the way across the board. It hit with audiences, critics, and the box office. Now we can add the Oscars to that list as the film picked up two nominations yesterday, one for Best Animated Feature and another for Best Original Screenplay. With nearly any other studio the sequel would already be in pre-production. So what does all this say about the potential of Inside Out 2? According to the movie’s director, it’s a possibility, but far from a forgone conclusion.

Pete Docter already has one Academy Award for his work on Pixar’s Up but he has the potential to add two more to the trophy case as he both directed Inside Out and is one of four people credited with the screenplay. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, it’s clear that Docter is over the moon about the Oscar nominations, but that doesn’t mean he’s chomping at the bit to make a sequel.

Pete Docter is echoing comments that we’ve heard before from various people from within Pixar. There is little or no pressure within the company, or the larger Walt Disney Studios, to make sequels simply because a movie did well. Instead, the filmmakers focus on what stories they have to tell, and the best way to do that. Here, Docter says that the characters of Inside Out were only designed to tell this particular story, not necessarily a potential sequel. Moving them into another movie isn’t as simple as all that.

It’s very similar to comments that John Lasseter made regarding the upcoming Toy Story 4. The plans within Pixar had been to end the film series with the third installment, but the idea for the fourth film came along and they simply couldn’t pass it up. It’s possible that some idea for a great story might come along for Inside Out as well, and it does seem clear that nobody would hesitate to make that idea if it ever came along, but nobody is necessarily looking for it either.

We certainly aren't against Inside Out 2, especially with the confidence that Pixar would only make the movie if they had the right idea for it. What did you think of Inside Out? One trick pony, or sequel worthy?

In order to make Inside Out one of the best films of 2015, director Pete Docter had to weed out the bad ideas from the good. Most of those left on the cutting room floor are never talked about again. But there was one idea that was so bad Pete Docter has now decided to reveal it to the world. That’s because Inside Out’s co-writer and director almost gave each of the film’s emotions human names.

Obviously, with hindsight, we can all immediately tell that would have been a rather ridiculous idea. But, during the conception of Inside Out, Pete Docter has admitted that he and his fellow Pixarers were convinced this was the way to proceed.

They’d even picked out specific names for each of the emotions: Anger was going to be called Ira, Fear was Freddy, and Pride was Preston. I can kind of get on board with Fear being named Freddy, but does the character below really look like an Ira:

The name for Pride was deemed so bad that the character was written out of Inside Out all together.

In a new clip from Inside Out’s special Blu-ray/DVD release, which The Hollywood Reporter have sneakily got their hands on, Pete Docter talked about why they were originally tempted to use these names for their characters, and how this decision was ultimately changed. Docter explained:

It’s been interesting to learn just how different Inside Out almost was. While the film’s production can hardly be considered a mess – especially not in comparison to Toy Story 2, Ratatouille, and The Good Dinosaur, all three of which were mired in problems – Pixar made sure to give Pete Docter enough time to figure out the best way to not only create this cinematic world, but how to enter it and tell a story.

Through the course of Inside Out’s conception, there were a number of other emotions that were almost granted starring roles in the film. In fact, instead of Riley’s head just being populated by Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Fear (Bill Hader), Anger (Lewis Black), and Disgust (Mindy Kaling), they almost had Irritation, Envy, Greed, Gloom, Despair, Depression, and Love to contend with, too. All of the latter failed to make the final cut, though.

And let’s thank the heavens that Pete Docter and his crew ultimately reached that decision. Because with them, Inside Out could have become a bloated free-for-all. But without, it is easily one of the best films of 2015, and, arguably, Pixar’s most complete film to date.

We're getting another Up movie, but it's not exactly what you think. While the beloved Pixar film seemed too emotional to be true, there’s a famous house in Seattle that shared a similar story, and it’s that house that’s getting made into a movie next.

The Hollywood Reporter was the first to report the news. The real-life story on which this film will be based centers on the home of Edith Macefield. The farmhouse stood in Seattle for more than 100 years before developers started buying up the properties in the area and replacing them with modern structures. Macefield, an elderly woman, stood her ground. According to reports, she turned down a $1 million offer to sell her home. She told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in 2007:

The emotional epicenter of the film will center on her relationship with Barry Martin, the man supervising the building project that was trying to kick her out. The two struck up an unlikely friendship as Martin routinely checked in on the woman while a mall was built all around her home. When Macefield passed away, she willed the house to Martin.

Given this story and the visual similarities, the house became known as "The Up House." In addition to fans tying balloons to the roof, a music festival in Ballard was named after Macefield and, according to The Washington Post, a local tattoo parlor has been giving out "steadfastness" tattoos in commemoration. The home is currently owned by a non-profit that is fending off threats of demolition. A fundraising campaign was implemented to help raise money to move the beloved house to Orcas Island. Take a look inside the house through the video below.

The still-untitled film will be made through Fox Searchlight, and can also use material from Martin’s 2013 memoir with Philip Lerman, Under One Roof. No director is attached at the moment, though Will Gluck of Annie and Easy A will produce the film with Jodi Hildebrand.

Pixar has come out and said that their film Up is not inspired by Macefield’s tale, though it’s hard to deny the similarities. Directed by Pete Doctor, who most recently helmed the emotionally charged Inside Out, Up focused on Carl Fredricksen. In an effort to save the home he shared with his late wife and to fulfill his adventurous ambitions, he sets off into the air by tying thousands of balloons to the roof of his house.

Pixar’s success with its current creative offering, Inside Out, continues to showcase the company’s ever-evolving conceptual depth. Yet, the film’s premise, which focuses on characters representing the emotional inner-workings of a young girl’s mind, is not entirely new territory. Interestingly enough, the inspiration for the idea was derived, in part, from a defunct Disney Epcot attraction.

When discussing the inspiration for Inside Out, director Pete Docter cites some sources in the field of animation such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and an obscure World War II-era animation short, Reason and Emotion. Most notably, Docter recalls his tenure starting as a development intern on an Epcot attraction called Cranium Command. The ride-ish attraction, which lasted from 1989 to 2007, encased the audience in a theater designed to resemble the inner chamber of a young boy's mind, looking outward through his eyes as characters representing his parts of his mind interacted amongst themselves. As Docter tells Disney Insider:

The backstory to Cranium Command depicts the present park patrons as volunteer recruits who participate in a program designed to train pilots to operate and safely control human brains. Beginning with a lively animated intro building up the premise with a bellicose big boss named "General Knowledge," the patrons are then sent to a theater designed as some type of pseudo-technological hub of the brain of an apparently troubled 12 year-old boy. A set of monitors prominently represent his eyes as we see him go about his day-to-day activities from the first person point of view. However, the clear star of the show are the characterized pieces of the boy’s biology, presented in a form more conducive to Epcot Center’s previous leanings towards more educational endeavors.

Whereas Inside Out represents its psychological characterizations based on emotions like Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, and Disgust, Cranium Command took a necessarily biological approach to illustrate the physical workings of the body. An impressive array of comic and dramatic talent provided voices, such as Charles Grodin as the appropriately uptight "Left Brain," playing opposite the always loquacious late-80’s Saturday Night Live centerpiece Jon Lovitz as "Right Brain." Lovitz’s SNL brethren, Dana Carvey and Kevin Nealon played "Left Ventricle" and "Right Ventricle," Cheers barstool occupant, George Wendt played "Stomach," and Bobcat Goldthwait managed to put down his Police Academy blues to lend his killer voice to "Adrenal Gland."

Check out the video below to catch a preserved performance of Cranium Command during its twilight.

While the experience of a long-outdated Epcot attraction can hardly be comparable to the deeply heartfelt narrative accomplished by Inside Out, it does serve as a fascinating deconstruction of this clearly successful concept. Yet, the parallels between the two projects also provide an equally intriguing construct on how the fields of medicine and psychology can take radically different approaches to a similar aggrandizement of seemingly normal adolescent issues. While Cranium Command chose to represent these ideas through the body, Pixar, understandably, went the more poetic, flashy, colorful route with its five emotions.

While it may not teach you any noteworthy science lessons, you can catch Pixar’s Inside Out for an entertaining, heartfelt experience in theaters now.

Inside Out has proven to be another success from Pixar. The film that follows the emotions that live inside the mind of a young girl earned a whopping $90 million at the box office opening weekend, making it the highest-grossing debut of an original film in history. It wasn’t enough to beat Jurassic World for the number one slot, but it’s still a major triumph, which begs the question, will Pixar opt for a sequel? As far as director Pete Docter is concerned, that probably won’t happen.

Entertainment Weekly recently spoke with Docter and Pixar Animations Studio President Jim Morris about the success of Inside Out, which has floored both of them. When asked, though, whether they were thinking about riding the success into Inside Out 2, Docter said that he has no plans for one at this point in time and expressed his desire to create more original content for the studio. The previous films he directed for Pixar are Up and Monsters Inc., and while the latter earned a sequel with Monsters University, he wasn’t a part of it. Though, Docter did say, "never say never" to an Inside Out sequel.

Aside from Monsters Inc., the only other Pixar movies that received sequels were Toy Story, Cars, and Finding Nemo. (Finding Dory is currently slated for theaters on June 17, 2016.) Though there aren’t that many, Cars and Toy Story have branched out to become their own franchises. Whether the same could be done for Inside Out, is unclear.

Inside Out features Amy Poehler as the voice of Joy, Phyllis Smith as Sadness, Bill Hader as Fear, Lewis Black as Anger, and Mindy Kaling as Disgust. Together, these five emotions guid Riley on her path in life. But when the young girl and her family move to San Francisco, Sadness becomes more prominent. Worse still, a freak accident throws her and Joy into the wilderness of the mind leaving only Fear, Disgust, and Anger to influence Riley. The majority of critics called it one of Pixar’s best for placing a spotlight on those lonely kids — or anyone, really — trying to cope with major changes in their lives.

If a sequel is not in the cards, Docter and producer Jonas Rivera want to bring this property into the Disney parks. While visiting Pixar headquarters in Emeryville, California, Docter said that he already spoke with the parks people about making this a reality. The process, however, is extremely complicated and involves a lot more than the desire to make it happen, but both hope to one day see their characters walking around Main Street.

When watching the "Family Dinner scene" in director Pete Docter’s Inside Out, you may have noticed something interesting. While the young Riley is shown to have emotions of different genders – with Joy clearly being female and Anger clearly being male – the same cannot be said for the personifications of the emotions in the minds of her parents. There are probably many ways that this can be interpreted – including pragmatic reasons from a marketing and storytelling perspective – but it turns out Pixar Founder John Lasseter has a theory of his own about this interesting difference, and it all has to do with changes we go through as we get older.

Lassetter’s thoughts on the matter were actually shared with my by Pete Docter when I had the chance to sit down with him for a one-on-one interview a couple weeks before Inside Out was released. Discussing the genders of the emotions in both the mind of Riley and her parents, I explained how I interpreted it as people maturing into more gender-specific individuals, and the filmmaker explained that Lassetter had similar thoughts on the matter. Said Docter,

Explaining his own approach to the dinner scene in Inside Out, however, Pete Docter said that they were ultimately two things that were absolutely vital to the scene: clarity and comedy. Had Riley’s parents both had multi-gendered emotions like their daughter, the scene would have been going back between 18 different characters, and it was a bit unruly unless everyone was identifiable. Not only did making the emotions gender specific in the parents make the sequence easier to follow, but it also opened up an opportunity to create a few extra laughs. Explained the director,

When you saw Inside Out, how did you interpret the dinner scene and the differences between Riley’s emotions and her parents? Did you not think twice about it, recognizing it as a necessary story tool, or did you formulate your own special interpretation of what it meant? Hit the comments below with your thoughts – and if you haven’t seen the movie yet, go check it out, and then come back here!

As it exists, director Pete Docter’s Inside Out tells a beautiful and emotional story about a change that occurs in all of us as we grow older, but what you may not know is that the plot didn’t always revolve around the Amy Poehler-voiced Joy and the Phyllis Smith-voiced Sadness trying to find their way back to headquarters. In fact, there was almost a point where the film actually had Joy out on a mission that would have had movie-goers likely making quick comparisons to The Lord of the Rings.

A couple weeks ago, I had the pleasure of sitting down for an interview with Pete Docter to talk about his latest film, and one of my earliest questions was about early versions of the plot. Animated movies famously go through a lot of building-up and tearing-down in their story phases, with the finished product looking sometimes very different from the other original ideas. I asked Docter if this was the case with Inside Out as well, and he described what would have been a very different plot for the Pixar movie. Said the director,

It’s weird to think of this version of Inside Out, if not only because it likely would have meant that all of the "Riley" stuff that made it into the theatrical cut of the movie would have had to been changed, and made to revolve around a single bad memory. Unfortunately, Docter didn’t give me any more details about the direction of this project, but I could definitely seeing the story having a similar conclusion to the final version: Joy begins to understand the importance of the bad memory instead of just rejecting it, and winds up using it to help Riley develop as a better person.

Of course, as alluded to, this wasn’t the only alternate version of Inside Out that Pixar was at one time developing. In fact, there was a time when the major supporting character of the entire movie, Sadness, was a part occupied by a very different emotion. Docter explained,

Can you imagine Inside Out with its more Lord of the Rings-y plot, or Fear taking Sadness’ role? I’m personally quite happy the movie turned out the way it did.

Inside Out is now playing.

As any fan will tell you, Pixar really loves to include Easter Eggs inside all of their feature films. Whether they’re nods to the studio’s past or future work, or even inside jokes among the filmmakers, the little gags included by the company do their part to help make the movies endlessly entertaining, as it’s fun to search through with an Eagle Eye and try to spot them all. Now Inside Out is getting ready to hit theaters, and I can assure you that it’s just as reference-filled as its predecessors.

How do I know this? Because I recently had the fantastic opportunity to sit down with director Pete Docter, and he clued me in on some of the standout Easter Eggs that fans will be able to spot in the movie. Read on to learn some of the small secrets in the movie, and after you’ve had the chance to see Inside Out for yourself, hit the comments section and tell us about the others you spotted!

A113

If you’ve noticed the "code" A113 in Pixar movies before, there’s a very good reason. At the California Institute of the Arts, A113 was a classroom used by graphic design students – such as John Lassetter and Brad Bird. As a nod to this, every Pixar has the inside joke featured somewhere, and Inside Out is no different. While it’s been used by the studio on license plates and in model numbers in the new past, the new film makes the most appropriate use of it yet, as A113 is actually the classroom we see Riley go into on her first day of school in San Francisco.

The Pizza Planet Truck

First introduced in Toy Story, the Pizza Planet Truck is another regular Easter Egg utilized by Pixar. It’s been said that it’s in every single film the studio has released with the exception of Brad Bird’s The Incredibles, but even that has been called into question. Potentially making up for The Incredibles’ lacking, Pete Docter told me that the Inside Out Pizza Planet Truck should actually be very visible to fans, as it is featured in three different shots. Admittedly I missed it during my screening, but now you know to look out for it!

Arlo From The Good Dinosaur

Because animated movies take so long to put together, Pixar is always working on multiple projects at once, and planning deep into the future. While this sounds very stressful, one added bonus is that the movies can feature little references to the movie that will come out after it. This has been happening since Pete Docter’s Monsters Inc. - which featured a small clownfish as a Easter Egg pointing to Finding Nemo - and it’s a tradition that Docter has kept going with Inside Out. Because the new movie will be followed by The Good Dinosaur later this year, you can actually get a glimpse of the lead character, Arlo, in the film.

Colette From Ratatouille

While the first three Easter Eggs that Pete Docter revealed to me are all regularly featured in Pixar titles as a kind of tradition, this last one is a bit of a bonus that the filmmaker and his animators threw into the mix - seemingly just to have a little fun and give die-hard fans something to spot. You’ll have to be quick to spot this one, but if you enjoyed the adventure in Ratatouille, then you’ll want to pay attention. Docter didn’t mention exactly what scene it was featured in, but he did say that there is a moment in Inside Out where you can see some magazine, and featured on the cover is Janeane Garofalo’s character, Colette, from Brad Bird’s 2007 film.

The habitual manipulators of our emotions at Pixar are readying the release of this weekend’s Inside Out, showcasing psychologically innovative internal storytelling. In the run up to that debut, though, one of the new film’s co-directors has dished on one of the company’s most critically devastating moments in 2009’s Up, revealing that the famous scene was almost cut from the movie!

In an interview with Yahoo!, Pete Docter, who co-directed Inside Out, discusses a fateful cutting room decision that almost affected the course of your cinematic emotional state of mind during his last feature, Up. Apparently, one part from the famous Carl and Ellie "Married Life" montage in which Ellie is despondent upon learning that she will not be able to have children was the source of several "notes" from the studio, thinking that it may have been pushing things too far. Heeding the criticism, the scene was temporarily cut. However, something was clearly lost. According to Docter:

The film’s famous opening is nothing less than a heart-wrenching rollercoaster of emotions about the life lived together between main character, Carl and his lifelong love, Ellie. Yet, despite the bonanza of bittersweetness emanating from the sequence, Ellie’s sad revelation seemed an especially emotional low-blow from the creative minds, given that we would soon witness the couple grow old together, eventually leaving a sadly stoic Carl widowed. Yet, in a sense, that is also the point that emphasizes the tragic nature of their relationship. The best kind of tragedy is one in which the characters are seen as sympathetic, due to their helplessness against the often-cruel, vindictive power of fate.

If Carl and Ellie were portrayed as having children, then clearly, we’d be wondering later on why the movie isn’t about Carl passing on his legacy to them. Likewise, if the film simply proceeded as normal with Carl widowed, while not acknowledging why the couple didn’t have children, there might be a hint of that being the result of their own conscious decision. Besides this idea possibly rubbing some of the more family-minded viewers the wrong way, from a structural dramatic standpoint, cutting this crucial portion of the sequence also lessens the emotional impact of the long, beautiful life that they were shown to have shared and lost together. The implied (or even perceived) idea that they took an empowered agency in their own fate, mitigates the idea of them simply being tragic victims of it. In fact, if anything, it would show that they lived their lives fully on their own terms all the way to the end. That might be "sad" in a certain sense, but it is by no means "tragic." Catch the actual scene in the video below for a happiness-killing refresher.

Clearly, Pete Docter and his co-director Bob Peterson must have come to that realization, since the scene showing Ellie’s sad news obviously became an iconic example of movie melancholy magnificently Trojan-horsed into a kid’s movie. Sure, some might equate it to excessive, George R.R. Matin-esque anti-protagonist sadism, but it was clearly a necessary emotional punctuation that would have seriously softened the scene’s impact with its absence. The tragedy of old Carl Fredricksen is what makes his later joy and adventure in the film so powerfully poignant.

It will be interesting to see what kind of emotional baggage Inside Out can manage to saddle onto movie-going audiences. The film, showcasing some witty subconscious banter of a troubled young girl, hits theaters this Friday.

The reviews are in and Inside Out looks like another major success for Pixar, but it could have been a drastically different movie. There were a crop of characters, settings, and details left on the cutting room floor. For instance, while the film prepping to hit theaters this weekend features five core emotions — Joy, Anger, Sadness, Disgust, and Fear — the animators were toying with a sixth that didn’t make the final cut.

During the press day for Inside Out that took place at Pixar headquarters in Emeryville, California, we spoke with director Pete Doctor and producer Jonas Rivera. In reflecting on all the details they had to cut from the film, chief among them was the inclusion of an emotion called Logic. As the pair explained, they chose their core emotions based on research from Dr. Paul Ekman. He discovered that there are 3-27 different emotions that can be measured and observed in a person. The team at Pixar made their main character selections from this crop. Logic, which they also referred to as Reason, was up for consideration, but he was eventually cut out of the story because his presence had unforeseen implications.

One of the biggest questions Docter and his teamed asked themselves was, "are we our emotions?" He said:

Inside Out takes a peak inside the head of a young girl, Riley, to introduce the emotions influencing her life. Amy Poehler voices Joy, Phyllis Smith voices Sadness, Lewis Black voices Anger, Mindy Kaling voices Disgust, and Bill Hader voices Fear. Together they maintain Riley’s kooky personality, but things go awry when Joy, Sadness, and the core memories that let Riley develop her personality are thrown out of headquarters and into the wilderness of her mind.

As we previously reported, there were a number of other casualties in the battle to edit the story down to the necessities. In earlier drafts, Inside Out featured a number of different settings, like the hidden Secrets Vault that holds all of Riley’s secrets, Music Cognition for understanding music, and a place called Hobo Camp for all the forgotten doodles and imaginary friends Riley thought up when she was little.

Pixar has taken heat for years over the relative lack of female characters in their studio output-- while Disney has created unforgettable female heroines (and yes, princesses) in Belle and Rapunzel, Pixar's amazing films have focused almost exclusively on male protagonists, with the exception of supporting characters like Toy Story 2's Jessie and Monsters Inc.'s Boo. But next summer they're bringing us Brave, their venture into both a princess story and a female-driven adventure; the movie's heroine Merida, as we saw in the recent trailer, is both a badass warrior and a girl fighting against society's expectations from a "proper" female.

We have a few sketchy ideas of the projects Pixar has in the hooper to follow up on Brave, including the Monsters Inc. prequel Monsters University, and now John Lasseter has revealed that they've got yet another that will feature a female protagonist. Visiting the Charlie Rose Show, via The Pixar Times, Pixar chief John Lasseter revealed few details on the next project from Up director Pete Docter:

This project "set inside the mind" had been announced over the summer, but details were fuzzy beyond the working title The Untitled Pixar Movie That Takes You Inside The Mind. Lasseter's reveal, not just about the gender of the mind in question but the fact that we'll be limited to the mind of a child, gives a better sense of just how this might work, beyond just being a movie version of the "Body Wars" ride at EPCOT (remember that?) If you saw the Pixar short that preceded Toy Story 3, "Night and Day," you might have gotten a preview of what Pixar plans to do in telling a story about completely ephemeral ideas like times of day or ideas. Or hey, they might be doing something completely, totally different. The great thing about these guys is you never quite know what direction they'll take.

As much as I know it's silly to expect a quota system in movies, and demand that Pixar tell stories about women solely because they haven't yet, I'm really thrilled to see that Pixar wants to dig into the brain of a little girl. They're maybe the most marketed-to group for animated films, but probably the least recognized or understood. Pete Docter created an unforgettable little girl with Monsters Inc.'s Boo, so here's hoping he can do it again.

This is hardly news, but is so awesome that it would criminal to let it go unposted.

We've all written letters to someone famous when we were growing up. Whether is was a famous actor or actress, an athlete, or Santa Claus, somewhere in the world is a letter that went unanswered with a child's dream crushed with it. But what if those childhood heroes wrote back?

One such hero is Pete Docter, who directed two of your favorite movies, Monsters, Inc. and Up. Two years ago, a young filmmaker with hopes of one day working for Pixar wrote to Docter, talking up how much he loved Monsters, Inc. and all the work the studio has done. He was only hoping for a signed photo of Docter in return, but instead got the most awesome thing he'll receive probably in his entire life.

Docter not only wrote back, but also...well...just look for yourself below:

I'd have a heart attack if I got that in the mail. Seriously, what a nice guy he was for doing that. And now this Adam guy has something special that would be worth a fortune if he wanted to put it on Ebay, but will keep probably his whole life. I kind of can't get over how cool this is, and if I ever meet Pete Docter I'd thank him for being an inspiration and an all-around awesome dude. If you liked Pixar before, you'll love them now.

(Courtesy of Letters of Note.)

A pretty hilarious list of animated films from 1998 to the present, along with their respective directors, has been circulating around the tubes and /film was able to nail it down.

The list is relatively inconsequential as film news unless you're a burgeoning animation wannabee with big dreams. To those of you in that category though, this list means you need to get your ass to Cali.

Seems pretty one sided, don't you think? With the exception of Andrew Adamson, the director of the first three Shrek films (and let's be honest, those are hardly films despite their huge receipts and inexplicably enormous fan base), each and every animation director from the past dozen or so years has come out of Cal-Arts. It's a bit shocking really. Reminiscent of the film school brats, Spielberg, Coppola, Lucas et al., this list exists mostly as a recruiting tool for the school, and to get a few laughs out of film uber-nerds like us.

Pixar's Pete Docter is on top of the world right now, with Up sitting atop the box office for the second week in the row and receiving critical raves the likes of which we haven't seen since, uh, Wall-E. For any other director this would be a period of massive speculation, as he decided which studio to approach with his next project, what to take on next, and how to immediately get a sequel greenlit.

But Pixar is different, as we know, and we can be guaranteed that Docter's next project will be at Pixar and won't be an Up sequel. But what about a second visit to Monsters, Inc.? Word is coming from the Licensing Expo in Las Vegas that Disney told several buyers that a Monsters sequel is in the works. Slashfilm, which picked up on the report from Jim Hill, speculates based on some admittedly sketchy evidence that the movie will be coming in 2013.

Docter has suggested in the past that he's thought about a Monsters sequel, and it makes more sense than most for sequel treatment. At the end of the film Sulley and Mike are still working their same job, and in the finale frame Sulley is reunited with Boo, which means continued adventures with those two. We won't know until Toy Story 3 if Pixar can really get away with sequels when seemingly no one else can pull it off, but given their 10-film winning streak, my hopes are high. Still, would you rather see Docter revisit these old characters rather than taking on something new?