Pixar has had a little thorny driving in the box office in recent years. Dating from the original "Toy Story" in 1995, Pixar was one of Hollywood's safest hit creatorsEspecially when it comes to original films. Unfortunately, Kovid-19 pandemic changed it all in 2020, and the Disney Golden Animation Studio fell into relatively difficult times. Unfortunately, those difficult times continued with the announcement of "Elio".

Welcoming directors Madeleine Sharafian, Domi Shi and Adrian Molina, Elio opened only $ 21 million at home this weekend. It does, with a significant margin, the lowest open weekend in Pixar's history. The "Toy Story" opened on $ 29.1 million, but it was in '95 and, tailored to inflation, will be much more. After that is 2023 Elementary, which opened on $ 29.6 million before $ 495 million worldwide. However, it was a remarkable case that could not be considered to repeat.

Whether Elio can withdraw "elemental" remains to be seen, but even if there are similar feet, there will probably be a very difficult time clearing $ 400 million worldwide in the light of its very soft international US $ 14 million debut. In short, at least outside the gate, it is difficult to call this nothing but a massive accident for Disney and Pixar.

So what went wrong here? How did this well considered Pixar Original to suffer such a gloomy trade fate? We look at the biggest reasons why Elio went down to the box office for his open weekend. Let's dig.

"Elio" focuses on a foreign fanatical human child obsessed in space, which radiates from an interplanetary organization with representatives of the galaxies away and widely. Elio has been misunderstood as the country's leader and must form new bonds with these foreigners and navigate a crisis with inter -ghalactic proportions.

It feels like a kind of original concept that Pixar could sell effectively in the days of the old one, as the company did with Wall-E or "up". Unfortunately, that era seems to end. In 2024, three of the four biggest films of the year were all animated sequelsincluding "Despicable Me 4" ($ 969 million), "Moana 2" ($ 1 billion) and "inside 2" ($ 1.69 billion). Animation is very attractive. Pixar's good name still means something, but just as painful as it is to recognize, it means much more if the audience is represented by the continuation of the already established property. That is not to say that original ideas cannot be caught, but it is much harder to happen after the pandemic reconfigured viewers' attitude with Pixar.

How unfortunate as it is to shape this way, being an original was a creative means of "Elio". But, commercially, it was probably the biggest weakness of the film.

I am not a marketing expert and I will not pretend to be for the purpose of this article. That, he said, when it comes to the film from the studio like Disney, it is difficult not to notice when they drop the ball into something like "Elio". This is a big $ 150 million film from Pixar. Most of the time, it means a massive campaign that is impossible to miss. Although I am sure Disney spent money to take this movie into the world, they also did not advertise it efficiently or, probably enough.

"It seems clear that Elio was eventually victim of a parent company that decided to reduce losses and save money on an expensive marketing campaign", " /Film Jeremy Mataai recently wrote in response to how Disney handled "Elio" and his release. For any reason, Disney may be convinced that this film is not worth investing in excessively expensive, blanket, global marketing campaign such as "Moana 2" or "Inside 2." Do they spend those advertising money more clearly when you try to sell the original? Surely. But it becomes self-fulfilling the prophecy at some point if Disney is not ready to take that jump of faith in the light of the film's response, which we will dive here at one point.

Partly as a result of Disney's indecisive marketing campaign in the lead to posting, the studio was also unable to use a sincere great word for Spread for "Elio". As for this writing, the film has a very good 84% critical approval of "Wounded Tomatoes", but an ellevel rating of 91%. It can also boast a movies, which is one of the best indicators we have when it comes to how the film will take place after the weekend opening. Simply put, critics really liked the audience who sees it.

The problem? Without a bigger outcome of the weekend opening, it will be very difficult for this film to reach a large enough saturation point with the audience to make it completely hit. In his review, Ereeremi Matai called the film "Elio" the best original of Pixar from Coco, A film that made nearly $ 815 million worldwide. Well, it was in a very different time for the industry, but it is much easier to profit at the $ 50 million opening than opening $ 20 million. Even if the word for the mouth is ellevel, it means only so much when the number of opening the weekend is so small in relation to the film of this size.

It is very appropriate, in general, for the Pixar film to be released in the middle of summer. "Inside 2" has literally become the biggest animated film ever (for a short period) after hit the theaters last summer. So, it is not an inherent problem that Disney has decided to release "Elio" right at the heart of the summer film season. The problem ended as stronger than the expected competition he was supposed to face with this film.

Live Action at Universal "How to Train Your Dragon" held very well after the mass open weekendpulling another $ 37 million and top of the graphs. This is a family film trying to reach the same audience as Disney's own "Lilo and Point", which made $ 9.7 million on its fifth weekend and quickly closes the brand of $ 1 billion globally. The adult audience also had "28 years later" to attract attention. Well, it's less direct competition, but still attracts attention. All this is added to make a difficult situation even more difficult. On another weekend, who knows? Maybe this film would perform a little better in the fall or above Thanksgiving. However, at the crowded end of June, he is buried.

Perhaps more than any other factor playing here, Disney is only blaming. When the pandemic hit in 2020, "onwards" was at the earliest stages of its theater race. Disney decided to rush the film into Disney+ under unprecedented circumstances. Unfortunately, this has become a trend, with the likes of the "soul", "Luke" and "turning red" all go to Disney+ at no extra cost to subscribers over the next two years. At a time when streaming was already working to keep the audience at home, people have learned that Pixar's films - especially the original films of the studio - are essentially "free" at Disney+.

Disney CEO Bob Iger even admitted as such, saying in 2023"I think maybe he created a expectation in the audience that they would eventually be streaming and probably quickly, and there was no urgency." The harder it is to put a gin back in the bottle than to let go. Re -training of the audience to return to the theaters for these films will require an incredible amount of effort, and will probably cost a lot of money that may not return immediately.

Pixar's "Elio" suffered as a result of those decisions driven by panic, but his failure may not be Disney's signal that Pixar's originals are not worth doing. I previously argued that "Inside 2" was proof that Pixar needed to stay the course with originals. Given the wildly disappointing open weekend of this film, it is perhaps more precisely than ever. Only Disney should come back completely behind the film the next time around.

"Elio" is now in cinemas.