Disaster With ‘Elio,’ Pixar Has Its Worst Box Office Opening Ever - Look upon my works, ye mighty, and despair.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/22/business/elio-pixar-box-office.html
https://archive.is/b4xRs
IMG_3609.webp
The original space adventure sold about $21 million in tickets at domestic theaters from Thursday night through Sunday, putting new pressure on the once-unstoppable studio.

Pixar knew that “Elio,” an original space adventure, would most likely struggle in its first weekend at the box office.

Animated movies based on original stories have become harder sells in theaters, even for the once-unstoppable Pixar. At a time when streaming services have proliferated and the broader economy is unsettled, families want assurance that spending the money for tickets will be worth it.
But the turnout for “Elio” was worse — much worse — than even Pixar had expected. The film, which cost at least $250 million to make and market, collected an estimated $21 million from Thursday evening through Sunday at theaters in the United States and Canada, according to Comscore, which compiles box office data.

It was Pixar’s worst opening-weekend result ever. The previous bottom was “Elemental,” which arrived to $30 million in 2023.

A month ago, when the “Elio” marketing campaign began to hit high gear, Pixar and its corporate owner, Disney, had hoped that “Elio” would, in the worst-case scenario, match the “Elemental” number. Instead, it fell 30 percent short.

In wide release overseas, “Elio” collected an additional $14 million, on a par with the initial international results for “Elemental.”
Quality did not appear to be a factor: Reviews for “Elio” were mostly positive, and ticket buyers gave the movie an A grade in CinemaScore exit polls. The Rotten Tomatoes audience score stood at 91 percent positive on Sunday.

Pixar has also recovered from a period during the coronavirus pandemic when Disney weakened the animation studio’s brand by using its films to build the Disney+ streaming service, bypassing theaters altogether. Last year, Pixar’s “Inside Out 2” was the No. 1 movie at the global box office. It sold $1.7 billion in tickets.

But original animated ideas have fallen out of favor at the box office, analysts said. Pixar is not alone. DreamWorks Animation’s “Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken” flatlined in 2023 with $5.5 million in opening-weekend sales. Illumination Animation’s “Migration” arrived to $12 million that year.

The problem for Pixar is that its originals remain wildly expensive. “Ruby Gillman” and “Migration” each cost 50 percent less than “Elio” did. (Pixar movies are still produced entirely in the United States, increasing labor costs. Some other studios have started to rely on overseas production.)
On Sunday, Disney said it hoped a broader audience would find “Elio” over the coming weeks. The company pointed to “Elemental,” which overcame weak initial sales to ultimately collect nearly $500 million worldwide.

Families have had a lot of theatrical options of late. Universal’s live-action “How to Train Your Dragon” remake, for instance, repeated as the No. 1 movie in North America over the weekend, with $37 million in ticket sales.

Second place went to the auteur horror sequel “28 Years Later” (Sony Pictures), which debuted to about $30 million. David A. Gross, a film consultant who publishes a newsletter on box office numbers, called that total “excellent.” Directed by Danny Boyle, “28 Years Later” cost about $60 million, not including marketing.

“Elio” was third.

Brooks Barnes covers all things Hollywood. He joined The Times in 2007 and previously worked at The Wall Street Journal.
 
Ever since they kicked Latimer out for being too touchy feely Uncle Bad Touch since then Pixar has been in freefall because Disney only wants to make Woke propaganda from it not actually interesting kids films.
I didn't know he got fired. What year? 'cause Pixar has been pumping out turds ever since 2016.
 
It's literally CalArts: The Movie, apparently:
The film was conceived by Adrian Molina as a "personal coming-of-age story about youthful alienation." Molina was inspired by his childhood growing up at a military base and eventual enrollment at the California Institute of the Arts when developing the film's story. Director Madeline Sharafian described his feelings on the private art school by saying "he felt like he'd found his people there, he'd found his world".
Molina is gay. He has been married to Ryan Dooley since 2011.
 
What was that movie about?
5 min later
Oh, another dogwhistle for interracial relations and "The Message" of how Diversity™ creates Utopias™ and how heckin' societal rejects are the best among us.
It's just ... meh. Not bad, not good, just there. It's like they had the concept and then didn't do much with it. More on that later.
the artstyle is so great I can remember many key scenes and the vehicles they used since the day I watched in theaters as a kid.

It wasn't a box office hit but it keeps a cult status. I don't think any of the Pixar movies past Coco will be remembered like this.
They really have to let go of the Calarts style, invest more into the look of the film
I think this is a huge aspect of the "2D animation" era - sure, you can complain all the Disney princesses are nearly interchangeable; but their settings and surroundings are NOT. Most any location still from that era is immediately recognizable as being from the movie. You don't have that in anything Pixar post-Coco, really. Everything's interchangeable slop with a bit of color thrown on.
I found Soul moving. But I like that kind of music. I’ve heard and can understand that Coco did better with families (oldsters and youngsters) and Soul did better with young adults.
Coco and Soul at least entertain and interact with their premise, and DO SOMETHING with it. Elemental barely does, Turning Red doesn't at all, Inside Out 2 is just a sequel and so it does, somewhat, Luca is just generic slop you'd expect to see from a third-rate animation studio. Onward is .... I don't know what it is, but it would have been better as live-action I feel, standard HBO buddyslop movie.

I will say that Coco feels like a "mexican movie" done by whites who have a real love and respect for the source material and concepts, and studied it deeply, but in the end they're still telling a white story.

But Book of Life is a mexican movie made and told by beaners. And it really, really shows.

Now Pixar doesn't even try, even the ideas, if good, are executed lazily and poorly but somehow still costing $250m.
 
Maybe if this didn't have the ugly ass 3D CalArts style, it would sell better.
Seriously, every time one of these characters smiles, it's genuinely off putting:
View attachment 7541984
Maybe this is just my peeve but I hate this artstyle and I can't wait until it permanently goes away.
I actually liked this style, back when it was bespoke to Aardman Animations. That's who designed Wallace and Gromit, Chicken Run, and others.
rexfeatures-wallace-gromit-jpg_091957.webp

But now since every 3d animation studio insists on shoddily copy pasting this style on everything, it just reeks of cheap 3rd world pajeet animation techniques.


As Stated before I REFUSE to hire ANYONE that does this format. Because more often than not THEY DIDN'T EARN IT to be called an illustrator/animator
Hmmm.... Maybe someone should come up with an abbreviation for that! Possibly D.E.I. or something similar? :thinking:
 
I do not watch Pixar movies and do not care about their diversity or whatever, but I go to movie theaters a lot, and I had no idea this movie existed until I came to this thread. No posters, no displays, no collectible tchotchkes or popcorn buckets for sale. No one is going to see a movie that they don't know about.
 
I'm glad I grew up before the 2d Disney era ended
View attachment 7541983
Underselling it. Atlantis was a visual masterpiece and probably where disney peaked. It is insane how we went from a film where every single shot is a mastercrafted painting to the disgusting as fuck disposable offensively ugly slop that is beanmouth.1750670293444.webp1750670312231.webp1750670327178.webp1750670336296.webp1750670345700.webp1750670354290.webp1750670363139.webp1750670375942.webp1750670386156.webp1750670394259.webp1750670402870.webp1750670412193.webp1750670420544.webp1750670431410.webp1750670441258.webp1750670464616.webp1750670474195.webp1750670481804.webp1750670493071.webp1750670504221.webp1750670515571.webp

This is what we lost when 2d animation died.
 
The problem with the western (chiefly US/Hollywood) animation industry is that it's an incredibly oversaturated market. There are thousands of soulless cookie cutter animated films that follow this generic formulaic structure that the masses enjoyed for so long; outcast protagonist, builds their way up, has an anticlimatic moment, comes back up, and then a happy ending ensues. Pixar was once an antithesis to these types of movies with its innovative story telling methods and creativity. The studio pushed the limits of 3D animation back in the 90s and 2000s starting with Toy Story and they created a very high standard for CGI that was hard to reach. Unfortunately, when Disney bought out Pixar in 2006 and John Lasseter left in 2018, the animation studio went down a slow decline in the late 2010s and has become a husk of what it once stood for.


The numerous successes of Disney have also made the corporation very complacent. Why does the company really need to try anymore when it's already a mega-conglomerate home to recognisable multimillion brands including its own mascot Mickey Mouse? This sort of thinking is costing them billions of dollars in box office flops however. The new Snow White film lost $115 million and many found it to be blatantly disrespectful to the memory of Walt Disney.


On the bright side, people are growing tired of these soulless corporate cash-grabs disguised as diversity projects or "family entertainment" from big name animation studios. It must really be a sore spot for Disney that its rival Dreamworks, once demonised by critics for relying too much on pop culture references and called the anti-Disney/Pixar, is skyrocketing in the box office and receiving animation awards for The Bad Guys, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, and The Wild Robot. Of course Dreamworks has its hits and misses like any other animation studio, but it doesn't get as lazy and complacent like Disney does and the studio has both seasoned and new talent animating and directing their recent and upcoming films. Their recent films are enjoyable and have important messages without being overly political and preachy.



In order for the animation industry to actually grow and flourish again, the misconceptions that animation is only for kids and kids are too stupid to appreciate deep, beautifully animated films need to die fast. I don't even want to think about how many talented animators, directors, screenwriters, etc. and their unique, original ideas are outright ignored simply because they don't have the right contacts to get into the animation industry.
 
Mike Mignola (Hellboy, BPRD) was the art director for this movie, I think.

The current year CalArts style of animation is a huge turnoff for audiences. There's literally no difference between Elio, Coco, or Strange World. They look like the same movie.
 
Last edited:
Mike Mignola (Hellboy, BPRD) was the art director for this movie, I think.

The current year CalArts style of animation is a huge turnoff for audiences. There's literally no difference between Elio, Coco, or Strange World. They look like the same movie.
According to Mike Mignola he wasn't. Apparently Disney invited him over, told him they're making a movie with his style, and when he got there he saw thousands of drawings dissecting his art and explaining how it worked.
Mostly Mignola worked on sketches of the city itself and the fish speeders. So Disney had spent time reverse engineering Mignola's art without his knowledge. Which Mignola said was all well and good because he isn't entirely sure why he draws the way he does, it's just what personally likes and what's easy for him
 
Back