'The Good Dinosaur': Are we in another animated Golden Age?

'Dinosaur' is the newest film from animation powerhouse Pixar. While studios have had stumbles, audiences have been seeing Pixar and Disney, among others, put out some consistently good work over the last several years.

'The Good Dinosaur' stars Raymond Ochoa and Jack Bright.

In Pixar’s newest film “The Good Dinosaur,” forget everything you thought you knew about the prehistoric world. 

Dinosaurs survived, for one. In the movie, which is now in theaters, a dinosaur named Arlo befriends a Neanderthal named Spot. The depiction isn’t what a moviegoer might expect from a man-and-animal tale – Spot is crouched and growls, while Arlo is the more sophisticated one. 

The film is the second to be released by animation studio Pixar this year, a rarity. Pixar had skipped producing a movie in 2014. 

The studio is also coming off a massive hit in “Inside Out,” which was released this past summer. “Inside” became a box office smash and was incredibly positively received by critics.

Moviegoers are being given the opportunity to see animated films of very high quality in recent years when one examines the output of, for example, American animation studios. The term “golden age” in terms of American animation has been assigned in the past to a time period in which Disney was starting out after releasing the first feature-length animated motion picture, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” in 1937. That particular “golden age” usually encompasses Disney’s output from “Snow” into the 1960s.

The studio’s fortunes revived in the late 1980s with the release of 1989’s “The Little Mermaid,” and critically acclaimed films like “Beauty and the Beast” and “The Lion King” soon followed.

Disney, once the titan of animation, soon entered troubled creative times, however, with films like “Meet the Robinsons” and “Chicken Little” failing to win over critics. 

Meanwhile, studios Pixar and Dreamworks were both beginning to produce creatively satisfying content. While Dreamworks’ track record is far shakier than perennial winner Pixar, critics and moviegoers alike praised Dreamworks’ “Shrek” series (more so the earlier installments) and the “How to Train Your Dragon” and the “Kung Fu Panda” movies, both of which still continue to be produced. (The studio is by no means perfect, however – recent projects like “Mr. Peabody and Sherman” and “Home” were negatively received by reviewers.)

Pixar, meanwhile, has barely had a stumble since releasing the studio’s first movie, “Toy Story,” in 1995. While some have gotten better receptions from critics than others, there were only one or two movies that got mixed or negative reviews. 

Disney, in the meantime, has caught up. Recent films like the 2012 film “Wreck-It Ralph,” the 2013 movie “Frozen,” and 2014’s “Big Hero 6” all got good notices and have made Disney a power player again in the world of animation.

By this point, calling our era a “golden age” of animation seems somewhat limiting. In fact, if we’ve been in an animated Golden Age, then we might have to decide what our definition of an “age” would be – it would have stretched 20 years by now. That’s when Pixar released “Toy Story” and became a force on the scene. While Disney and Dreamworks’ fortunes have gone up and down, right now, we’re in a time period where the two – especially Disney – are more consistently putting out good content.

Producing good movies is a tricky alchemy, of course, and the successes of the last several years have been the result of certain talent being in the right place at the right time. But at the moment, multiple studios have made animated films an enjoyable and creatively sophisticated choice for a night out.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to 'The Good Dinosaur': Are we in another animated Golden Age?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today