When Pixar’s Space Adventure Crashed and Burned, It Revealed an Uncomfortable Truth About What Audiences Really Want
Picture this: You’re scrolling through movie showtimes, wallet in hand, ready to treat the family to a night out. On one side, you’ve got “How To Train Your Dragon” or “Lilo & Stitch” – a return of a classic story you know and love, perfect to showcase to a new generation of young fans. On the other, there’s “Elio” – a completely original space adventure about a kid who… well, you’re not entirely sure what it’s all about, but the animation looks pretty.
Which ticket are you buying?
If you’re like most moviegoers in 2025, you’re probably going with the the reboot. And that’s exactly the problem Disney and Pixar are facing right now.
The ‘Elio’ Catastrophe: A $250 Million Reality Check
Let’s talk numbers, because they’re absolutely brutal. “Elio,” Pixar’s latest original space adventure, just achieved something nobody wanted: the worst opening weekend in the studio’s 30-year history. We’re talking about a $25 million domestic opening for a film that cost at least $250 million to make and market.
To put that in perspective, “Inside Out 2” (a sequel) made over $650 million domestically ($1.6 billion worldwide). “Elio” barely scraped together enough cash to cover catering for the voice actors.
This isn’t just a bad weekend at the movies. This is a seismic shift that’s been building for years, and we’re all complicit in it.
The Sequel Supremacy: When Familiar Beats Fresh
Here’s where things get really depressing for anyone who claims to love “original storytelling.” Pixar’s top five highest-grossing films? All sequels. Every. Single. One.
- “Inside Out 2” ($653 million)
- “Incredibles 2” ($609 million)
- “Finding Dory” ($486 million)
- “Toy Story 4” ($434 million)
- “Toy Story 3” ($415 million)
Meanwhile, brilliant original films like “Soul,” “Luca,” and “Turning Red” got shuffled straight to Disney+ during the pandemic and never got their proper theatrical moment. Was that because Disney didn’t believe in them, or because they knew we wouldn’t show up?
The Great Excuse Factory
Of course, “Elio” defenders have plenty of explanations ready. “Disney didn’t market it enough!” “There weren’t enough showtimes!” “It’s summer blockbuster season, there’s too much competition!”
Hold up. Let’s examine these excuses:
Marketing Budget: Disney spent around $100 million promoting “Elio” – the same amount project that was allocated for “Lilo & Stitch” and “How to Train Your Dragon,” both of which audiences actually showed up for. The marketing budget isn’t the problem; maybe the way they marketed it was the wrong way, or the appetite just wasn’t there.
Lack of Showtimes: Sure, theaters are packed with “How to Train Your Dragon,” “28 Days Later,” and “Mission: Impossible: The Final Reckoning.” But guess what? But if people desperately wanted to see “Elio,” would they have found a way? That could be too much to ask audiences these days when leaving their homes for a movie is rarer and rarer.
Summer Competition: This might be the most revealing reason of all. We’re basically admitting that original stories can’t compete with established franchises. That’s not a scheduling problem, that’s a cultural shift.
The Uncomfortable Truth We Don’t Want to Admit
Here’s what really happened with “Elio”: We all say we want original stories, but when push comes to shove (and wallet comes to ticket counter), we choose familiarity every single time.
Think about your own movie-going habits. When was the last time you saw an original animated film in theaters versus a sequel or franchise entry? When “Encanto” was streaming on Disney+, everyone couldn’t stop talking about “We Don’t Talk About Bruno.” But did you see it in theaters first, or did you wait for the comfort of your couch?
And think of the audience? As much as adults can love movies like these, they are directed toward a young audience that relies on an adult to take time out of their day, buckle them up in the car, drive them to the local theater, pay for two or more tickets, and hope it was money well spent.
We’ve trained ourselves to be risk-averse with our entertainment dollars. A night out at the movies for a family of four can easily cost $80-100. With that kind of investment, we want guaranteed satisfaction, and nothing feels more guaranteed than a sequel to something we already love.
The Studios Are Just Giving Us What We Asked For
Disney and Pixar aren’t stupid. They see the same box office numbers we do. They know that “Toy Story 5” will pack theaters while “Elio” struggles to fill them. So when they announce three upcoming sequels (“Toy Story 5,” “Incredibles 3,” and “Coco 2”) out of five total projects, they’re not being creatively bankrupt, they’re thinking about their bottom line.
We’ve essentially voted with our wallets for a future of endless sequels, and now we’re shocked that’s exactly what we’re getting. Which is a real shame because the fans who are seeing “Elio” are LOVING it! Fantastic reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb, and Letterbox showcase just how wonderful the new, original Pixar movie is.
So What Do We Actually Want?
The “Elio” disaster forces us to confront an uncomfortable question: Do we actually want original stories, or do we just want to feel like we want them?
Maybe the real issue isn’t that studios won’t make original content, it’s that we’ve created an entertainment ecosystem where original content can’t survive. We binge-watch original series on Netflix, TikTok, and YouTube for free, then save our theater money for the “sure thing” sequels.
In this economy, they’ve turned moviegoing into such a precious, expensive experience that many can’t afford to take risks on the unknown. And in doing so, we’ve accidentally killed the very thing we claim to love: cinematic surprise.
The Future Is What We Make It
Here’s the thing though, it’s not too late! Every time we choose the original story over the sequel, we’re casting a vote for the kind of cinema we actually want to see. But it requires putting our money where our mouth is, not just our social media posts.
The next time you’re deciding between the latest franchise installment and that original film no one’s talking about, remember “Elio.” Remember that studios are watching those numbers, and they’re making decisions about the next decade of cinema based on what we choose this weekend.
So the question isn’t really whether audiences want original stories. The question is: Are we willing to pay for them?
Because if we’re not, we’d better get comfortable with “Toy Story 47” and a live-action “Monsters, Inc” which is just CGI Sully and Mike.
The choice is ours. The box office receipts don’t lie, but neither do our actual desires for fresh, innovative storytelling. We just need to figure out which one we care about more.
What do you think? Are we doomed to a future of endless sequels, or is there still hope for original cinema? Let us know in the comments – and more importantly, let us know with your next movie ticket purchase. Follow @NoConCulture for more!
