What makes a film good? Is it content that prioritizes universal appeal and is cautious with its themes? Or is it content that experiments, takes risks and confronts real fears? This has been the question that Disney has answered wrong for the past several years. 

Lately, you might have noticed that Disney-Pixar has been in a bit of a rut with original animated films. “Elio,” “Wish,” “Strange World” and “Lightyear” were utter box-office flops, and the studios have only found success in guaranteed cash-grab sequels like “Zootopia 2,” “Inside Out 2” and “Moana 2.” Why? The answer is in safe storytelling. Bob Iger, former CEO of The Walt Disney Company, claimed that “infusing messaging as a sort of number on priority in our films and TV shows is not what we’re up to. They need to be entertaining.” This means that Disney has shifted away from diverse, unique stories to prioritize generalized content with universal appeal, and it all comes down to one fatal assumption Disney made: that safe storytelling is the safest way to make a profit.  Clearly, audiences don’t agree, and Disney’s “Wish” is a great example of the consequences. Despite marking Disney’s 100th anniversary, the film had a net loss of around $131 million and was heavily criticized, described as more of a “corporate product than a magical event.” The film lacked creativity, instead following Disney’s formulaic narrative, failing to flesh out narratives and characters, and being overall forgettable. “Elio” is another box-office flop. According to Pixar artists who worked on the film, Pixar leaders erased scenes that suggested Elio was queer: “Suddenly, you remove this big, key piece, which is all about identity, and Elio just becomes about totally nothing.” In filtering Elio’s identity for the sake of political neutrality, Elio’s narrative of belonging and self-acceptance becomes generic, unrelatable, and overall low-stakes to the audience. In fact, many critics described Elio as a copy of the “adorkable,” young main characters from “Turning Red” and “Luca.” In playing safe, “Elio” became the biggest financial failure in Pixar history. 

Safe storytelling isn’t the safest way for these studios to make money. Instead of a couple hours of mindless entertainment, audiences want risk-taking narratives that leave a lasting personal impact. What does this look like? It’s studios that let their team experiment with unique animation, art styles, storytelling techniques, narratives, and mature or emotionally invoking messaging. Not studios that censor creative voices, erase unique narratives or dilute philosophical themes. 

This becomes obvious when looking at the recent success of independent films. Indie filmmakers have the creative freedom that big-wig studios like Disney-Pixar lack. They’re able to cover emotional topics, explore unique themes and highlight underrepresented stories. Despite this, they still are critically and commercially successful. In 2025, “Flow” became the first indie film to win the Best Animated Feature Oscar with its unique dialogue-free storytelling and depiction of authentic animal behaviors. While not animated, other indie films have also had resounding success: Mark Fischbach’s “Iron Lung,” Curry Baker’s “Obsession,” Kane Parson’s “Backrooms,” and Hayley Kiyoko’s “Girls Like Girls,” just to name a few within the past year. On “Iron Lung,” a reviewer said, "This movie that isn't going to be for everyone but, personally, I think that's way more of a compliment than it is an insult." Despite not following the safe, formulaic narratives that appeal to a universal crowd, these experimental projects are still attracting large audiences. 

Even Hollywood’s best animated films took risks. Sony Pictures’ “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” pioneered the blend of 2D and 3D animation. Universal Studios’ “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” directly tackled themes of mortality and anxiety. LAIKA’s “Coraline” used stop-motion techniques for a family horror film. Even Disney-Pixar films used to take risks: “Up” covered themes of grief and loneliness. “Finding Nemo” described the anxieties of single parenthood. “Zootopia” highlighted racial bigotry. All of these have become iconic, household films, and not because they’re from big studios or because of their universal appeal. Instead, they're unique, creatively engaging, and high-stakes, which encourage the audience to connect with the characters. It’s when a company prioritizes fast production and overly broad commercial appeal that you see a film flop. 

With upcoming Disney original films like “Hexed” and “Gatto,” audiences can only hope that the studios have learned from their mistakes. Even so, early social media feedback on “Hexed” expresses concern about the studio's reliance on the same “adorkable” personalities, generic narrative, and 3D stylization. It’s clear audiences are growing tired of the same old formula, especially with the success of rival studios that introduced new gold standards for narratives and animation. Without a doubt, Disney-Pixar has been dethroned from its top spot in animation. If the studio has any hope to resurface, leaders will have to rethink the dry, low-stakes formula and allow its films to flourish with creative excellence once again.