More on "LightY"

Stocks A to Z
1

Deadline is doing its usual analysis of the weekend box office:

https://deadline.com/2022/07/minions-rise-of-gru-box-office-…

The projections are for Comcast’s “Minions” film to take in $129 million over the four-day weekend. That would be first place.

For “Lightyear”, the projection is for the Pixar picture to have a total gross through Monday of $107 million.

Not a flattering comparison. So, one possible conclusion might be that families aren’t necessarily afraid of heading out to theaters; I’m sure many still are and that it impacted “Lightyear”, but nevertheless, these are the numbers as of now.

As previously stated, D+ would seem to be a big factor. But - and I do not see info on this, at least not yet - but I thought Peacock was supposed to get the film after 45 days, similar to the D+ window. Although I believe that to be the case, I do not know for sure, and I will say that perhaps the Peacock effect is not as strong as the D+ effect.

1 Like
2

While Peacock does have older Universal Studios content, it doesn’t really have a Universal hub like Disney+'s Marvel, Pixar and Netflix. It is more focused on the NBCUniversal family of television networks. In fact, even the Jurassic Park family of movies is currently playing on HBO, not Peacock.

There is no question that Lightyear’s performance was disappointing and a rare Pixar miss. I had hopes it would hold out but instead it’s cooled its jets. I am mystified how people could have been confused about it being Toy Story 5. Pixar was pretty clear it was a Buzz Lightyear movie, not a Toy Story movie. Maybe they just wanted Toy Story 5, and without Woody, they weren’t interested.

Minions, I would point out, is more adolescent humor, teenagers who make their own spending decisions, and young adult who still have the sense of humor of teenagers. Personally, I’ve never understood the appeal, but not every movie is for everybody.

Still, I would not be surprised to see the stories of the new generation of the Space Command on Disney+, similar to how we’ve seen spin-offs of other Pixar and Disney animation properties. If anyone hasn’t seen the new Baymax shorts series (just six episodes so blink and you’ll miss it), they are wonderful. They don’t feature any of the Big Hero Six characters, other than Hero and his mom (and Moochie the cat) but focus on Baymax spreading his own form of healthcare in the San Fransokoyo area.

I also just watched the short-run Star Wars Vision series after Kenobi ended and while I’m not normally a fan of anime, I loved the inventive takes on the Star Wars universe, blending Japanese art with Lucas’s world.

Fuskie
Who is also (finally) watching the Marvel What If series, and then will get on with Stranger Things Season 4…

Premium Home Fool: Ask me a Foolish Question, I’ll give you a Foolish Response!
Ticker Guide: The Walt Disney Company (DIS), Intuit (INTU), Live Nation (LYV), CME Group (CME), MongoDB (MDB), Trip Advisor (TRIP), Vivendi SA (VIVHY), JFrog (FROG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE), Axon Technologies (AXON), Blackbaud (BLKB)
Disclaimer: This post is non-professional and should not be construed as direct, individual or accurate advice
Disassociation: The views and statements of this post are Fuskie’s and are not intended to represent those of The Motley Fool or any other sane body
Disclosure: May own shares of some, many or all of the companies mentioned in this post: https://tinyurl.com/FuskieDisclosure
Fool Code of Conduct: https://www.fool.com/legal/the-motley-fools-rules.aspx#Condu…
Invitation: You are invited to interactively watch Motley Fool Live online television: https://www.fool.com/premium/live/
Call to Action: If you like this or any other post, Rec it. Better yet, reply to it. Even better, start your own thread. This is YOUR TMF Community!

3 Likes
3

I am mystified how people could have been confused about it being Toy Story 5. Pixar was pretty clear it was a Buzz Lightyear movie, not a Toy Story movie. Maybe they just wanted Toy Story 5, and without Woody, they weren’t interested.

The problem is that it wasn’t a Buzz Lightyear movie.

Oh, of course, the protagonist’s name is also Buzz Lightyear - but he’s not the same character that has been “Buzz Lightyear” for the last 17 years. That character is a toy, who went on a Hero’s Journey and accepted his role as a child’s plaything and formed bonds and friendships and relationships with the other characters in the Toy Story films (and D2V specials and books and attractions and everything).

This protagonist is a different character. He’s an adult human, who doesn’t even live in the same continuity as Buzz Lightyear, or any other character in the Toy Story franchise.

Like I said, my 9-year-old son was very frustrated by that fact. He expected this movie to feature Buzz Lightyear, and was confused and annoyed that it was somebody else instead.

Albaby

4

The problem is that it wasn’t a Buzz Lightyear movie.

It was entirely a Buzz Lightyear movie. It just wasn’t a Toy Story movie about the toy Buzz Lightyear.

But for those who did go to see it, you very much saw the origins of the toy in the movie it was based on. You saw the actions that were channeled by the toy, you heard the phrases that were used by the toy, you saw the personality that was reflected in the toy. In so many ways, the two are the same character even if one was a movie character and the other a toy character.

Pixar always operates on multiple levels. Frankly, I expect the kids understood what Pixar was trying to do more than the adults. I mentioned this before, but I think instead of a single line setting up the movie, they should have had a scene where Andy was watching the movie on VHS with his Buzz toy in hand, then the scene transitions into the movie. Kind of like hitting viewers over the head with a club, but maybe that’s what it would have taken.

Fuskie
Who had hoped that once moviegoers got over their surprise that this was not another Toy Story movie that they would have enjoyed what otherwise was a solid science fiction story, and an 85% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes suggests they did…

Premium Home Fool: Ask me a Foolish Question, I’ll give you a Foolish Response!
Ticker Guide: The Walt Disney Company (DIS), Intuit (INTU), Live Nation (LYV), CME Group (CME), MongoDB (MDB), Trip Advisor (TRIP), Vivendi SA (VIVHY), JFrog (FROG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE), Axon Technologies (AXON), Blackbaud (BLKB)
Disclaimer: This post is non-professional and should not be construed as direct, individual or accurate advice
Disassociation: The views and statements of this post are Fuskie’s and are not intended to represent those of The Motley Fool or any other sane body
Disclosure: May own shares of some, many or all of the companies mentioned in this post: https://tinyurl.com/FuskieDisclosure
Fool Code of Conduct: https://www.fool.com/legal/the-motley-fools-rules.aspx#Condu…
Invitation: You are invited to interactively watch Motley Fool Live online television: https://www.fool.com/premium/live/
Call to Action: If you like this or any other post, Rec it. Better yet, reply to it. Even better, start your own thread. This is YOUR TMF Community!

3 Likes
5

t was entirely a Buzz Lightyear movie. It just wasn’t a Toy Story movie about the toy Buzz Lightyear.

That’s the point. Since it’s not about the Toy Story Buzz Lightyear, it’s not about Buzz Lightyear. It’s about a completely different character, brand new to film, that is named Buzz Lightyear.

They’re not the same “person,” within the fictional frames of the stories. Buzz Lightyear, the deuteragonist of the four Toy Story films, is a toy. He is not the human astronaut upon which that toy is based. Indeed, if we get a smidge lit crit on the story, his entire narrative arc in the original Toy Story was him coming to terms that Buzz Lightyear the toy is a different person than the “real” Buzz Lightyear.

Which is why, I think, the movie missed with younger viewers like my son. He was expecting Buzz Lightyear. He got a completely different character than the one he was expecting, one who was confusingly named and drawn the same as the one he’s known for years, but (confusingly) not the real Buzz.

6

…it’s not about Buzz Lightyear. It’s about a completely different character, brand new to film, that is named Buzz Lightyear.

Okay, it’s not about Buzz Lightyear but it’s about a character named Buzz Lightyear?

Does anyone else think that something is missing in this statement? Like possibly any kind of logic?

Walt

7

Okay, it’s not about Buzz Lightyear but it’s about a character named Buzz Lightyear?

Does anyone else think that something is missing in this statement? Like possibly any kind of logic?

I think you’re missing the point.

In-universe, the franchise establishes that there are multiple people that have the name “Buzz Lightyear.” There is the person who is the deuteragonist of the four Toy Story films, various shorts and D2V specials, and a host of other media products. That character is a toy, manufactured somewhere on earth, who has a specific personality, relationships, and experiences that make him who he is.

The new movie creates a new character, who is not a toy and does not even live in the same universe as that first “Buzz Lightyear.” This person is a character in an in-universe movie - a living astronaut from a different planet who has a completely different personality and life experiences than the “Buzz Lightyear” who has been in the Toy Story products for the last seventeen years.

That’s the problem. It might have seemed clever in the writer’s room, but it was really confusing and frustrating to my 9-year-old. To them, Buzz Lightyear is the person who is a toy who lives(d) in Andy’s room and was friends with Woody; not an actual astronaut who has never even been to earth and has no idea who Andy or anyone else is. Those are two different characters, even if they share the same name - and it probably created a huge barrier to having young fans of the franchise really get into the movie.

Albaby

8

I’m sorry, but today’s kids have been asked to comprehend things far more complicated than the idea that Buzz Lightyear the toy was based on Buzz Lightyear from a movie. We’re not even dealing with the concept that there was an actor with a completely different name who played Buzz Lightyear in the movie.

I’m sorry your 9yr old was confused, but I know other 9yr olds who were not only not confused but have no problems explaining to me how to use my phone, why climate change is real and how to protect themselves in an active shooter situation at their school. Let’s not forget Andy was 6 in Toy Story 1 and he understood he was playing with a toy based on a movie.

Fuskie
Who notes Lightyear may have been a movie about rockets but it’s conceit was not rocket science…

Premium Home Fool: Ask me a Foolish Question, I’ll give you a Foolish Response!
Ticker Guide: The Walt Disney Company (DIS), Intuit (INTU), Live Nation (LYV), CME Group (CME), MongoDB (MDB), Trip Advisor (TRIP), Vivendi SA (VIVHY), JFrog (FROG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE), Axon Technologies (AXON), Blackbaud (BLKB)
Disclaimer: This post is non-professional and should not be construed as direct, individual or accurate advice
Disassociation: The views and statements of this post are Fuskie’s and are not intended to represent those of The Motley Fool or any other sane body
Disclosure: May own shares of some, many or all of the companies mentioned in this post: https://tinyurl.com/FuskieDisclosure
Fool Code of Conduct: https://www.fool.com/legal/the-motley-fools-rules.aspx#Condu…
Invitation: You are invited to interactively watch Motley Fool Live online television: https://www.fool.com/premium/live/
Call to Action: If you like this or any other post, Rec it. Better yet, reply to it. Even better, start your own thread. This is YOUR TMF Community!

3 Likes
9

I’m sorry your 9yr old was confused, but I know other 9yr olds who were not only not confused but …

Maybe try explaining that to Tom Hanks?

Tom Hanks Reacts to Tim Allen’s ‘Lightyear’ Absence: “I Don’t Understand That”

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/tom-hank…

“How about that?” Hanks replied, appearing a bit befuddled about the situation. “Actually, I wanted to go head-to-head with Tim Allen, and then they didn’t let Tim Allen do it. I don’t understand that.”

As I’ve tried to explain to you previously Fuskie, Disney is starting to unfortunately develop a reputation for bad writing. The IP is there, and has tremendous potential, but then you get these writers that appears, at least from a fan stand-point, to just not give a damn about the property, and create whatever story THEY want, not the ones the audience expects. Historically, that is not how Disney has developed its brand. If there’s no respect for the characters, and the story created around them, people will stop viewing. That goes for Pixar, for Marvel and Lucasfilm. The more Disney doesn’t recognize that, the more Disney+ will be filled with more and more content no one wants to watch more than once.

Dominic

3 Likes
10

Tom Hanks is a great actor and producer, but I am guessing he was taken out of context. If Allen had voiced Buzz Lightyear the movie character, it would have been even more confusing that the movie character was not the same Buzz as the toy character. Again, it’s not rocket science.

Fuskie
Who thinks when a movie has a box office disappointment on opening weekend, it’s more a question of marketing than writing, because nobody has seen the movie yet to be able to say the writing was bad…

Premium Home Fool: Ask me a Foolish Question, I’ll give you a Foolish Response!
Ticker Guide: The Walt Disney Company (DIS), Intuit (INTU), Live Nation (LYV), CME Group (CME), MongoDB (MDB), Trip Advisor (TRIP), Vivendi SA (VIVHY), JFrog (FROG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE), Axon Technologies (AXON), Blackbaud (BLKB)
Disclaimer: This post is non-professional and should not be construed as direct, individual or accurate advice
Disassociation: The views and statements of this post are Fuskie’s and are not intended to represent those of The Motley Fool or any other sane body
Disclosure: May own shares of some, many or all of the companies mentioned in this post: https://tinyurl.com/FuskieDisclosure
Fool Code of Conduct: https://www.fool.com/legal/the-motley-fools-rules.aspx#Condu…
Invitation: You are invited to interactively watch Motley Fool Live online television: https://www.fool.com/premium/live/
Call to Action: If you like this or any other post, Rec it. Better yet, reply to it. Even better, start your own thread. This is YOUR TMF Community!

2 Likes
11

I’m sorry, but today’s kids have been asked to comprehend things far more complicated than the idea that Buzz Lightyear the toy was based on Buzz Lightyear from a movie.

To clarify - he comprehended that the Lightyear character in the current film was different than the one in all the other movies. But he was confused why that was the case. He was very excited to see a Buzz Lightyear movie - and was confused and frustrated by the fact that the makers decided to make the movie about a completely different Buzz Lightyear character.

It’s not about intelligence or grasping the concept. It’s about a little kid being excited to see another movie about a character that he loves, and what happens when the movie ends up being about a completely different character altogether. That doesn’t make the movie a bad movie, but it does make it less likely to draft and audience based on the built-in affection for the Toy Story franchise - and more likely to generate a little friction between audience expectations and what’s actually on the screen.

Albaby

2 Likes
12

If Allen had voiced Buzz Lightyear the movie character, it would have been even more confusing that the movie character was not the same Buzz as the toy character. Again, it’s not rocket science.

If McDonalds hired you to make their hamburgers, but you said “hey, I can make better. more tasty hamburgers like they make at Smashburger!” Who is the confused one then? McDonalds for not wanting a tastier hamburger? The customer for not appreciating what they were getting? Or you for not understanding you’re working to make McDonald’s hamburgers? Like you said, it’s not rocket science. Stick to the formula that works and everyone expects.

13

If Allen had voiced Buzz Lightyear the movie character, it would have been even more confusing that the movie character was not the same Buzz as the toy character. Again, it’s not rocket science.

Minor quibble - what talking toy of a popular movie character wouldn’t feature the recorded voice of the same actor who played the movie character? Or at least a very passable imitation? There no reason why the toy version of Buzz Lightyear would sound different than the movie version of Buzz Lightyear.

Who thinks when a movie has a box office disappointment on opening weekend, it’s more a question of marketing than writing, because nobody has seen the movie yet to be able to say the writing was bad…

Other minor quibble - it doesn’t have to be about the marketing - it can be about the writing, though not necessarily about “bad” writing.

Sometimes it can be because the movie-makers have written a film that audiences aren’t particularly interested in seeing. The marketing can be really good at letting audiences know about the movie, and presenting the movie in the best possible light - but if that isn’t something the audience is looking for, you’ll get lackluster interest. Even if the movie is a really well-executed and well-written presentation of that story, if the story isn’t something audiences want, they’re not going to show up.

2 Likes