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.
 
Sorry for the late reply but this blew my mind when I heard it. Hawaii should try Disney at the Hague for this, it’s like demoralization propaganda for the Hawaiian people.

I don't think the Lilo & Stitch live-action movie was made specifically to demoralize Hawaiians to leave their Failed State, since their Government's policies are already doing that without the need of Disney's 'help'. Cost of living is spiraling out of control, the State still remains very anti-industry friendly with projects such as the SuperFerry and Thirty Meter Telescope being cancelled, more and more taxes are being implemented since the State is Deep Blue Democratic (maybe even moreso than the likes of California, New York, and Illinois), and they continue to waste tax money on things such as the infamous Skyline rail system on Oahu that has shitty ridership and will never even break even on its own.

It is so bad that if DOGE were to have taken a serious look at Hawaii's finances and where the money goes, the entire department would all get simultaneous aneurysms and their eyeballs would pop right out of their sockets because of the sheer corruption and incompetence.

If I was Hawaiian I would be tinfoiling that that movie was made to demoralize Hawaiians into leaving so Disney can buy more land. Not that it needs to be- the situation for Nani and Lilo would play out exactly like it did in the remake, with a one bedroom in the Central Valley or Vegas, CPS knocking at the door, and Nani working gig jobs in a state she’s never been to before, delivering groceries to people with a timeshare on her parents land. It’s an unintentional indictment of the fate of Hawaii and as I write this I can feel myself becoming a Hawaiian sovereignty activist. Maybe in the remake there’s a pan out shot where we slowly realize Nani and Lilo are living next to Red Hill and Lilo starts to get dizzy from all the heavy metals. At least that would have had a message.

Disney would also throw in some hand-fist Lahaina fires reference to the film, and then somehow blame Nani and Lilo for being at fault for it somehow, instead of helping them out.
 
The other twist villains didn't really have that where other characters went "Yooooo wtf this changes/explains everything?", they just kinda brushed it off and dealt with it like they were always opposing them. Where are the in-universe reactions, man? Even Anna had a "Holy fuck!" moment, but she just kinda forgot about it afterwards.

That's why Big Hero 6's reveal sucked so hard. First there was the plot hole...if you went back and watched the movie, the relation between Callaghan and the CEO guy was typical of the "professor dismissive of rich industrialist, money vs. science for humanity" interactions...and this grand plan for revenge meant that he had to pretend that things were fine despite the CEO guy losing Callaghan's daughter to a void plane...and his revenge plot basically revolved around the fact to start a fire, steal the neural trasmitter to the microbots, have the microbots actually WORK in saving him, and then using that to his fake his death and proceed with Phase 2 in ruining the CEO's guy's life, all of which he came up on the fly with.

But you're right, it's the reaction of the other characters. The other characters (Go Go, Wasabi, Honey Lemon, and Fred) seem surprised at first but then actively sabotage Baymax's attack mode, despite the fact that they knew Callaghan better then Hiro did, and the beloved professor would turn out to be a complete monster with zero regard for human life and a thief who stole Hiro's microbots. Then they had the gall to criticize Hiro's actions ("We never signed up for this!" / "We said we'd catch the guy, that's it") despite the fact that they should've been just as upset as Hiro was.

Sure, they were completely sold that it was the CEO guy and may be deep in denial that Callaghan was behind it all, sure, maybe they follow the old "no kill" credo, but instead let him go and blame Hiro for it, and receive no comeuppance for it.
 
There used to be a consistent Pixar animation style, humans were more "realistic" looking with every film until they started to hit the start of the uncanny valley
Pre-Calart pixar human characters are all jointless, play-doh people. The worst case was that little fat fuck in Up. This said, back then they were able to inject some character in their designs. The big brother in Onward do sorta look like Chris Pratt.
1_MYz6ckTuKf8jpv2rPKiOWg.webp

BTW
calarts.webp
 
I really feel like Pixar completely collapsed once John Lasseter was given the boot. The last truly good Pixar movie was Inside Out, maybe Coco, but after that it's been nothing but slop.
It's rudderless ship without its captain. Though the true rot came when Disney started to cannibalize talent from Pixar to the main division. Honestly at this point Pixar is just an IP farm as all their New stuff have been expensive bombs or flops, something I thought I'd never see given even their weak films made bank.
 
Pre-Calart pixar human characters are all jointless, play-doh people. The worst case was that little fat fuck in Up. This said, back then they were able to inject some character in their designs. The big brother in Onward do sorta look like Chris Pratt.
View attachment 7577048

BTW
View attachment 7577049
“No it isn’t our fault and if you call us out you’re siding with a rapist!”
 
Blade would be a toxic masculine stereotype, not allowed. Probably also a slavery thing to go with it
Reminds me of what they did with Boondocks S4, kicked the original writer off and made a whole modern slavery arc which both curbstomped the grounded but silly nature of the show's politics, and Huey's "rebel without a cause" personality that gave him more depth by giving him a cause to fight against.
 
I have no idea what happened to Incredibles 2.
It felt like it wanted to be a feminist movie/literal role-swap of what Bob went through in the first film, but I have no idea what they were thinking. The script rewrites over getting cold feet definitely fucked it over especially since they couldn't push the release date back for more time.
 
Movies-by-committee suck.
Part of what made The Lion King so good was the fact the demons at Disney were more focused on Pocahontas as their "prestige" film at the time so Lion King was allowed to develop with less meddling.

What do you guys think those men and women are like? Do they sit in their homes and think about how bad their decisions are? Do they care? Are they sentient? Do they just look down on the people who pay their salaries?
 
Pre-Calart pixar human characters are all jointless, play-doh people. The worst case was that little fat fuck in Up. This said, back then they were able to inject some character in their designs. The big brother in Onward do sorta look like Chris Pratt.
View attachment 7577048

BTW
View attachment 7577049
Unfortunately this retard's not wrong; CalArts was about Disney's 80s-90s works originally, not beanmouth crap. That being said, I'd be surprised if John thought the beanmouth was an improvement, considering it's more sterile and emotionless than its precursor.
 
Tbh, there's good animation and then there's self indulgent animation. Him doing the hand gesture where the rings glow is entirely superfluous, doesn't really add much to the scene and seems more like the director flexing over what he can do at the expense of probably 500 manhours worth of work.

Part of the craft is knowing what to cut and what to keep and what to not even start working on in the first place.
It's also a problem when 100% of the effort goes into the animation, and nothing into parts like design, audio, lighting, cinematography.

The introduction of Zigzag likely took hundreds of man hours, but it's such a laughable scene and just cements the character as a comedic villain who does silly stuff
1751322960627.webp

Compare it to the introduction of Jafar.
Way more simpler animation wise, but does so much more for the character and comes off as way more memorable than Zigzag's eye gore
1751323119550.webp
 
The introduction of Zigzag likely took hundreds of man hours, but it's such a laughable scene and just cements the character as a comedic villain who does silly stuff
Wasn't that the point, though? Dude walks and strolls in a zigzag motion, clearly demands he walks on a red carpet, has really weird blowout shoes, and lost his shit over stepping on a tack. He's just a bizarre, petty character.
 
Pre-Calart pixar human characters are all jointless, play-doh people. The worst case was that little fat fuck in Up. This said, back then they were able to inject some character in their designs. The big brother in Onward do sorta look like Chris Pratt.
View attachment 7577048

BTW
View attachment 7577049
Video the autist screencapped.
He didn't go too deep but basically post-2020 Pixar's philosophies (design and writing) got less distinct over time and less appealing for everyone adults. The video used Carl as an example and I can say that, besides silhouette, there's more use of color theory and shape language. See those tennis balls? They stand out so much, with the saturation and roundness compared to Carl himself. This isn't just because the tennis balls are used in jokes. It's to add realism to Carl's age and fragility, as well as a representation of his resistance to change. Little details that add up to make a design distinctly memorable, and can help sell the themes.

Those characters in the thumbnail do use color theory to indicate personalities (yellow for upbeat Silencio Bruno, red for rebellious Mei (?) and blue for Elio), but honestly I don't need to see the full designs to see that the shapes aren't as distinct as Carl's. To be fair to Elio's design, I think they tried to apply the detail philosophy to it. However, with people asking, "Why does he have an eyepatch? Why does he look like that?" it worked against his design since it's so unclear. I know he got the patch after a fight with bullies but I digress. While the idea is "wannabe space commander but kid" parody, it's apparent that the design didn't sell the character. Was there a thematic reason Elio got that injury? Who knows. The audience wouldn't want to find out.

Sam also insisted that bean mouth works better in 2D, but that's only half the story. Bean mouth is to make animation cheaper and easier, yet it's not "fun." It's the visual equivalent to candy-colored mashed potatoes. People hate Alegria partially because it's so bland (except when it's obnoxious but I'll get to that) yet so ubiquitous, that it's both easy to get sick of and hard to avoid. You know the GrubHub commercial? Do you want to watch hour+ long versions of them? I won't watch Turning Red because it reminded me of that, both bland and obnoxious (for ""spice""), and it's no surprise that people saw blandness in Elio. Pixar's work in general has gotten so underwhelming most of the time, that it loops around to being repulsive, and audiences are getting tired.
 
Last edited:
The only thing I know about this film from the news is that:
1. It was an abject failure and huge loss of money.
2. The people involved believe this was due to a child's film not being brown and gay enough.
also 3. the turning red people hijacked the movie and rewrote the whole fucking thing, changing the original secondary main character into the main antagonist. I think that's like the biggest fucking factor here that's pissing people off ont op of the beanmouth grubhub shit and pixar's response to it doing bad being "oh well disney censors lgbt soooo"
This is from Pixar's actual Instagram account.
"maybe you should support original stories!"
WELL YOU GUYS CLEARLY FUCKING DIDN'T! :story:
 
Back