Pixar's Lightyear Is an Underwhelming Anachronism
To infinity and beyond? Not quite.

The strangest thing about Lightyear is the initial premise. This isn't just a sci-fi spinoff for the toy character whose presence disrupted the social life of a little boy's toy collection in the first Toy Story oh-so-many decades ago. Instead, it's presented as the movie that Andy, the little boy from the Toy Story films, watched in 1995 that made him want a Buzz Lightyear toy in the first place. In a title card that plays at the start of the film, the movie specifies that this is Andy's favorite film in 1995.
There are two problems with this. The first is that it doesn't play anything like a movie from the 1990s. It's jokey and hectically paced, with quippy supporting characters and some pro forma lesson-learning about what it means to grow up and accept failure. And it includes some ingrained cultural assumptions that, while handled gracefully, would almost certainly not have appeared in a popular 1990s kid-friendly movie, particularly when it comes to same-sex marriage.
So while it's better than many movies targeted at kids, it's lower-tier by Pixar's lofty standards. It's a movie that settles for kid-friendly competence rather than reaching for the stars.
But that brings me to the next problem with the premise: This is a kids movie. Yes, it's a sci-fi-tinged picture, with some robot action and an ostensibly dangerous planet, but the tone is light and snarky, without any real sense of danger or darkness. Kids might like this sort of thing, especially younger ones. But it's hard to believe that a boy like Andy would pick this, of all movies, as his favorite film, even for a brief period of time.
It's too generic, too cute, and most of all, it doesn't feel in any way like a gateway into adult ideas and feelings. And kids like Andy—a creative dreamer who'd had some hard times in his life and partially retreated into a fantasy world in which his toys come to life and have a complex friend-society—tend to gravitate toward movies that feel like introductions to something beyond their own childhood experiences.
I distinctly remember an elementary school exercise from my own childhood, which would have taken place in the early 1990s, in which my classmates and I were asked to name our favorite movies. Some of the top choices were R-rated fare like Aliens and Terminator 2. Even the less-aggressive picks were movies like The Wizard of Oz, a child's fable with a dark undercurrent.
Yet Lightyear is a kids film that only very occasionally treads into more adult thematic territory, with Buzz Lightyear going on a series of space missions that involve time-dilation, so that every time he leaves, his community ages four years, while he ages just a few minutes. This leads to one of the movie's best sequences—a montage depicting the passage of many years on the ground, while Buzz stays the same age.
Among other things, that sequence delicately portrays a marriage between two women, including a brief, loving kiss at a 40th-anniversary ceremony that has produced some controversy, including bans in multiple countries. It's warm and touching, but it's also another anachronism. Unless Andy lives in a universe with a substantially different social/political trajectory than ours, it's hard to believe it would have appeared in a kid-friendly space epic in 1995, during Bill Clinton's presidency, when less than 30 percent of Americans supported same-sex marriage. Today, of course, support for same-sex marriage is very broad, if not quite universal, but that just reinforces the awkwardness of the setup: In no way does Lightyear feel like a movie from 1995.
Rather, it feels like a modern Pixar movie, with action, heart, and humor aimed squarely at the squirmy-kid set, and an emphasis on frenetic back-and-forths and obvious sight gags. Pixar's movies have always had elements of calamitous comedy to them, but they've also tended to be smarter, slower, and more reserved than other kid-friendly animated films. Studio executives at Disney, which was overseeing Pixar's debut film, reportedly pushed for the original Toy Story to be edgier; part of its charm was its relative quietness, which allowed some real emotion to shine through.
There's no such depth of feeling in Lightyear, which is disappointing given Pixar's history of infusing seemingly kid-friendly products with moments of real adult feeling and darkness lurking at the edges. Pixar could have taken this premise to make a movie that actually said something about the 1990s, rather than dutifully reflecting the current moment, but it chose not to.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Yes, the Lesbian Love Scene in the kids movie is anachronistic, that’s the problem that needs reviewing in a cartoon.
Poor Tim Allen must be turning over in his grave
You made me check that Tim Allen IS STILL ALIVE. #FakeNews
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (res-32) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career & can gain more dollars on-line going this article.
that is what I do.>> https://Www.Profit97.Com
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (keb_14) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career &
can gain more dollars online going this article.......... http://getjobs49.tk
"Among other things... portrays a marriage between two women, including a... kiss."
Welp, that will make it mandatory classroom viewing and give it an Oscar nomination.
"Among other things, that sequence delicately portrays a marriage between two women, including a brief, loving kiss at a 40th-anniversary ceremony that has produced some controversy, including bans in multiple countries. It's warm and touching, but it's also another anachronism. Unless Andy lives in a universe with a substantially different social/political trajectory than ours, it's hard to believe it would have appeared in a kid-friendly space epic in 1995, during Bill Clinton's presidency, when less than 30 percent of Americans supported same-sex marriage. Today, of course, support for same-sex marriage is very broad, if not quite universal, but that just reinforces the awkwardness of the setup: In no way does Lightyear feel like a movie from 1995."
Suderman needs to admire how clever and seamless revisionists operate since the days of Soviet airbrushing.
Suderman needs to admire how clever and seamless revisionists operate since the days of Soviet airbrushing.
Yeah. "Welcome to The Great Retcon." They've been cramming false diversity into movies and TVs for 30 yrs. To the point that even comic book fans are like "Wait, this is getting too unbelievable." and Suderman's just now realizing they have might have a point.
Wait, are you telling me that black people didn't enjoy 50% representation at the highest levels of British society in 1827?
This touches on something I've long wondered about. A lot of British movies and especially TV shows over the past, what, 30 years, have included biracial couples as part of the background scenery -- witnesses to be interviewed, customers, etc. It's always puzzled me. While the US does have more biracial couples now than before, their representation in movies isn't nearly on the level of British shows.
Is this Britain trying to do like Pixar with this anachronistic lesbian kiss? Or does British society actually have more biracial couples than the US?
My suspicion is wokism, since I've noticed it in shows set in earlier times too. I doubt there were very many biracial couples in 1950s Britain, or 1930s.
Wish I could cite some actual movies and episodes, but it seems general enough that possibly others have noticed too.
Well Pocahontas and John Rolfe were an interracial London couple in the 1600s. But one expects, from the Austin and Bronte books at least, that the principal concern of those upper class getting married was "How many pounds annually does he (or she) bring to the marriage?"
Heh, I'd forgotten about those social justice pioneers. Thanks for the reminder.
I think there’s some of it in The Tudors, the White Queen, The Spanish Princess, The Great.
I didn’t mind it in Black Flag or Harlots or anything coming out of the Caribbean or red light districts as the mores and social customs are far more elastic on the fringe of society… same as the colonies regarding natives. And Pocahontas was native royalty. Her father wasn’t a minor chieftain. There’s going to be a bit of elasticity, there, too.
It’s where it enters the court that it gets very weird.
Just gonna leave this here in case anyone's got any questions.
I should add that you can triangulate the wokeism/wokewashing in the UK much the same way you can see it in the US. It's certainly gotten better in both places in the last couple of years as retarded projects went and go broke, but for quite some time like in the US where everyplace that wasn't New York or LA was a hick backwater, the UK went the other way, everyplace that wasn't London looked as cosmopolitan as London just with different accents. Moreover, unlike how Spielberg got stuck with Billie Dee Williams and James Earl Jones' voice and not much else in the way of cultural diversity, the UK shows have headliners from all over Europe, Africa, and Asia but, apparently, can't fill Belfast or Aberdeen roles with people actually from Belfast or Aberdeen.
Good grief!
Hahahahahahahahaha...
Now to take Benin or Nigerian history and cram it full of white men. Have the King of Dahomey played by Bruce Willis...
Or better yet American history. Dred Scott played by Christopher Walken.
The dahome were the biggest bastards in the whole American slavery saga. Those female warriors weren't the result of egalitarianism, they sold almost all of their men into slavery. Including well after 1865.
I did know a British teenager in the mid-1960s whose parents appeared to be a racially mixed couple. The father's brown skin was well within the range of what we in the U.S. would call "black", but I was told that he was from southern Italy, not from Africa. And Michael himself, the son, looked as white as any typical Englishman. I've sometimes wondered since what the real story was, and if it was different from what I was told.
As for the world of Lightyear, I guess we can assume that, yes, "Andy lives in a universe with a substantially different social/political trajectory than ours".
It may have to with legal quotas on "diversity" in British media. Not merely a desire to be "woke".
Watch some commercials. Almost every commercial that features a family is a mixed raced. Asian and white, white and black, Hispanic and ethnically ambiguous. I can't say I've watched much British TV, but it seems that it's getting pretty common here. The new "Cheaper by the Dozen" is a mixed raced family. Several TV new sitcoms are as well.
If you’re not gay, I don’t want to hear what you think about Lightyear.
particularly when it comes to same-sex marriage.
This is what Hollywood calls "updated for modern audiences". And why everything sucks, because modern audiences, at least how Hollywood perceives them-- are the most humorless prigs on the planet.
"make a movie that actually said something about the 1990s,"
Why would they do this? Their target audience of today's kids neither knows nor cares if this fun cartoon film accurately portrays a time a decade or two before they were born.
Many kids do care about stuff from back then….
JFC. Is anyone surprised?
Pixar is dead now that they booted out Lassiter.
The studio that innovated the look and feel of movies is now just virtue signaling bullshit. I unfortunately watched Turning Red with my daughter and could not believe how shitty and dull everything was. Not to mention I don’t think most parents want their 5 year olds learning about fucking menstruation. But hey, directed by a BIPOC who ticks all the boxes!
I’m looking forward to the Toy Story prequel, where Andy identifies as pansexual and gets into jerking it.
And jerks it in front of Woody, who likes it a little too much.
"And kids like Andy—a creative dreamer who'd had some hard times in his life and partially retreated into a fantasy world in which his toys come to life and have a complex friend-society—"
WTF is this psychobabble horseshit? Andy wasn't retreating into anything. In the Toy Story universe toys were actually alive whenever humans weren't present.
Technically, even when they were present, if you remember the darker scene where they scare the shit out of the toy mangling neighbor kid. They just had a strong commitment to hiding it.
"but that just reinforces the awkwardness of the setup"
Oh, really? "Awkward"? It wouldn't be anything like, oh, a mandatory corporate policy of injecting same-sex couples into every children's film?