No, if you look at the user reviews from sites like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes, people liked it okay enough.

I think probably what we’ve ended on in terms of what went wrong is that we asked too much of the audience

Aye pal, you blame the audience.

My girlfriend and I saw this film and we were surprised because it was very cliche. So many of the lines were catch phrases. It just kinda...moved forward. It wasn't anything more abstract than it was just poor writing.

Seriously? LOL...that makes no sense to me

The tone should have been like that videogame scene that starts TS2. That was perfect. Funny, imaginative, and exciting. BL had a shit story and wasn't funny at all. It was terrible.

I forgot about that show. I totally remember the robot being my favorite character.

i mostly agree, at least in the current context, but I think the idea of "Buzz as space hero" could totally have worked... 20+ years ago. Kids who watched Toy Story in the 1990s loved Buzz as an actual toy. It was a HUGE success in toy stores and spawned a successful cartoon too. The official Toy Story 2 video game was even specifically marketed as a Buzz Lightyear game, "Toy Story 2: Buzz Lightyear to the Rescue".

They missed their window.

A Pixar produced Buzz film in the late 90s or early 00s would have been gigantic.

Lightyear is actually an interesting science fiction film that just shouldn't have anything to do with Buzz Lightyear.

It's another victim of only spin-offs getting greenlit, so everyone with an original screenplay has to cram it into some other property that people have heard of.

The thing is that Interstellar is not any 10 year old boy's favorite action movie. The Buzz Lightyear toy could definitely not have come from the movie that they made. That's the core problem. The Buzz Lightyear TV show understood this. They could definitely have made an action adventure movie along those lines and gotten buy in.

Damn, this thread is surprisingly toxic. Did people hate this movie? I thought it was okay.

[deleted]

*Bob Cheapskate

A failure is a failure is a failure. Since Disney isn't registered as a non-profit charity organization, anything that loses them money isn't seen as a success

[deleted]

I wouldn't even put it in my Top 10 of 1995.

I think that since there’s nothing much happening, you’re drawn to analyse every details in each scene. You’re trying not to miss anything asking what’s wrong with this picture. Then I realize this is essentially what Sophie is trying to do as well. The amazing thing is that Charlotte Wells, the director, didn’t even need to have her narrate to make us feel what her intentions were. We were asking the same questions: Is he ok? What is he thinking right now? Why is this important? All this is only possible by the great actors who are able to portrait all the subtleties of emotions. Showing a smile to hide shame, staying silent when in anger, avoiding eye contact when annoyed. I was also really impressed by all the emotions I felt while being shown so little. I could talk for hours about this movie!

Lol 200mm is nothing in Disney money. You know what is Disney is worth right?

My kids (7 & 5) were pretty lost but liked the robot cat. They've never asked to watch it again which is rare.

>Idk why Disney didn’t put turning red in theaters, especially after their first Asian led superhero movie did well,

Because Bob Chapek

[deleted]

[deleted]

I liked it. I thought is was a good story and a valid movie that makes sense being something Andy liked.

[deleted]

I don't think it needed Woody or Rex. It needed to feel like the same character. I don't buy that toy Buzz thought he was this guy, and his blocky suit completely clashes with the strangely gritty tech.

Buzz Lightyear of Star Command did this much better.

> we asked too much of the audience

Hey Pete Docter - the audience wasn’t too stupid to “get” your shitty movie.