Animated Feature Nominees (92nd Academy Awards)

https://lebeauleblog.com/2020/01/27/animated-feature-nominees-92nd-academy-awards/

Toy Story 4

(the above clip ends at about 2:20)
Just take a look at the difference in the computer animation in Toy Story 4 and what the very first Toy Story movie had on tap and you’ll see that there has been an enormous leap forward in what the art form can do. The work here is amazingly detailed and richly executed within the confines of the Toy Story/Pixar house style. Each rendered item has more realistic heft, texture, and responds to light in a much more substantial way. Never mind the increased creativity of how Pixar is using the “camera” its movies are “shot” on (sometimes it’s hard to remember that’s not really what’s happening).

My problem with Toy Story 4 obviously has nothing to do with its animation. The issue for me is with the sloppy messaging of the movie. The baby doll figure who wants Woody’s voice box in the above scene is Gabby Gabby. It is explained in the film that she came out of her box with a busted voice box of her own, and she blames this defect for not being able to find a child to be a toy to. Her solution is to rip Woody open and steal his for herself. Yeah, that’s pretty intense, isn’t it?

How the movie treats this impulse is kind of all over the place. Are we supposed to believe that people with a congenital defect tend to respond violently? Are we to excuse it if they do? Should their difference really be framed as a defect to begin with? Aren’t there lots of dolls in the Toy Story universe without a pull string voice? Is giving her that missing voice the best way to get her the connection she craves? The movie doesn’t really deal with any of this in a satisfactory way, and it left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I’m a speech pathologist, so it’s my job to help kids use whatever voice they have to improve their lives. Unfortunately, Toy Story 4‘s treatment of this topic didn’t pass the smell test for me.

experts’ rank: 1
my rank: 4