Culture Pete Docter Says Pixar Cut LGBTQ Storyline From ‘Elio’ Because ‘We’re Making a Movie, Not Hundreds of Millions of Dollars of Therapy’

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Variety - Archive

Pete Docter, chief creative officer at Pixar and director of “Monsters Inc.,” “Up” and “Inside Out,” recently told the Wall Street Journal why the studio decided to completely overhaul 2025’s “Elio” and cut out the film’s LGBTQ storyline.

Docter told the WSJ that Pixar didn’t want to expose its young audience to things they weren’t ready to see or hadn’t discussed with their parents. He said, “We’re making a movie, not hundreds of millions of dollars of therapy.”

“Elio” follows a lonely kid who looks to the stars for friends after being rejected as an outsider by other kids his age. Despite the clever premise, WSJ reports that the film tested poorly in early screenings, with most audiences saying they wouldn’t pay to see it in theaters. In response, Docter ordered a complete overhaul of the film, even though a significant chunk of the animation was complete. The overhaul led to the exit of the film’s original director, Adrian Molina.

Madeline Sharafian and Domee Shi then stepped in and made significant changes to “Elio.” This included, according to the WSJ, removing moments that indicated the title character was gay. Previous versions of the film reportedly showed Elio with a pink bike and had a scene where he imagines a life together with his male crush. The changes sparked backlash within the Pixar staff, drama that was compounded by Disney’s decision to cut a transgender character from Pixar’s animated series “Win or Lose.”

“Elio” launched in June 2025, earning $150 million worldwide at the end of its run. That would be a stellar number if it weren’t for the fact that the film cost $150 million to produce, not factoring in global marketing costs.
 
Docter told the WSJ that Pixar didn’t want to expose its young audience to things they weren’t ready to see or hadn’t discussed with their parents.

What a load of shit. The truth is later in the article!

Despite the clever premise, WSJ reports that the film tested poorly in early screenings, with most audiences saying they wouldn’t pay to see it in theaters. In response, Docter ordered a complete overhaul of the film

If you "didn’t want to expose its young audience to things they weren’t ready to see or hadn’t discussed with their parents" then why did you make the whole fucking movie and then show it to test audiences?

No one wanted to see your piece of crap propaganda so you had to dial it back. A more honest quote would be " Pixar WANTED to expose its young audience to things they weren’t ready to see or hadn’t discussed with their parents, but couldn't figure out how to do it."
 
“Elio” follows a lonely kid who looks to the stars for friends after being rejected as an outsider by other kids his age. Despite the clever premise
I love it when the mask slips and the article openly admits it is propaganda. Nothing about what they described there is clever, replace "look to the stars" for another quirk or hobby and you have around 30% of children's movies.
 
It's been rather infamous from the get-go. Pic related.
View attachment 8669443
Disney tried its best to rework the movie into a parent-child story. What remains in the movie is a child who at his pubescent age discovers he's really into aliens and starts attempting to lure aliens into abducting him. Which when viewed under the original context of childhood homosexual awakening is absolutely horrifying.
 
I haven't even heard of this movie in the first place.
I'd be scared to see what the people who were originally making this movie look like.
Seen a guy unironically calling it an allegory for cinsensual pedophilia, even as I consider that too far fetched to be true, the movie is just extremely ugly; not just because of the bean mouth, there's also the fact that the photgraphy of the movie itself is formatted to be clipped for tiktok reels, most of the stuff happens on a tight section, so that you can fit it on your phone screen.
Absolute dogshit movie, having it nominated as "best animation" serves perfectly as a yearly reminder that the academy awards, just like any other award ceremony are a joke.
 
In 2023, Disney released a movie called Strange World, where the main character was a half black half white gay kid who had a crush on another half black half white gay kid. That movie was the biggest animated bomb Disney ever had, losing them around $200 million when all was said and done.

This all happened while Elio was still in production, so it doesn't surprise me that they made these decisions in an attempt to dodge another bomb. Didn't work though.
I'm surprised I haven't heard much of Strange World's development, I kind of assumed that the entire budget got pissed away and the original concept was unmarketably worse.
 
Abdil - Brown gay child
Hambo - Brown gay child
Kooki - Brown gay child
Are these all real pixar movies? Has pixar transitioned to the "one word, misspelled" naming scheme? I've seriously never heard of any of these.
 
Having the plot be the writer's therapy session has been the rule for western media in the last decade.
Either that, the writer's barely disguised fetish or a mix of both.
There's no therapy within helluva boss, its either bullshit or viziepop masturbating at gay couple, and I bet there's less therapy session than fetish in elio as well.
Adventure Time ruined everything.
I genuinely hate the impact Adventure Time had to cartoons, especially because I genuinely liked that series, but I too believe that what the direction it was taking was not healthy, as it set the path for others to follow.
 
I genuinely hate the impact Adventure Time had to cartoons, especially because I genuinely liked that series, but I too believe that what the direction it was taking was not healthy, as it set the path for others to follow.
Like pretty much every show ever made, it should have ended after season three.
 
What happened in it?
Buzz Lightyear's commanding officer was a butch black lesbian. Buzz, voiced by Chris Evans, was a white male buffoon and got everyone stranded while the LBGTQ+ womyn of color was hypercompetent. She raises a son with her lesbian lover, and a later descendent (womyn of color as well) becomes Buzz's future teammate. At one point Buzz has a chance to go back in time, but refuses out of consideration for the LBGTQ+ womyn of color's proud existence and lifestyle.

Banned in most of the Arab world. ABSOLUTELY HARAM. Commercial flop that lost Pixar $100,000,000.

The thing that I could not understand at all about the Buzz Lightyear movie was that the conceit of it, according to Pixar themselves, was that this was supposed to be the movie - in the Toy Story canon - that got Andy obsessed with the idea of Buzz Lightyear.

That Andy saw this movie and was so completely blown away and inspired that it caused the Buzz Lightyear obsession we saw affect Andy (and all of the other children, for that matter, including Sid) in the first Toy Story movie.

But there was literally nothing in that movie that a six year old boy would think was cool or inspiring or awesome.
 
Either that, the writer's barely disguised fetish or a mix of both.
There's no therapy within helluva boss, its either bullshit or viziepop masturbating at gay couple, and I bet there's less therapy session than fetish in elio as well.
I only watched the pilot, but isn't the main character rebelling against her dad? Plus a lot of fetish media is the author trying to justify and normalize it.
Like pretty much every show ever made, it should have ended after season three.
Smiling Friends bro it's still too soon...
 
View attachment 8669706
View attachment 8669707
The last time pixar movies were profitable was back when they were heterosexual.
I'd rather be speaking about this than whatever beanmouth bullshit the last near decade that Pixar has been putting this stuff out.

I suspect something has to be going on in these studios where the higher ups (managers, not shareholders) know exactly what the audience wants but the creative people they have working for them are braindead retarded. I forget which director/artist it was (Matt broly?) who was making a tweet that made fun of Disney for wanting to make movies for Gen Z. These people just hate young white boys/whatever physical identifiers they are allowed to hate and thus most of the youth that are near their age. I want someone to answer this question but: how long do you think this sort of sewerage is going to keep getting put out until something decent comes out to rival the likes of skibidi toilet?
 
Pixar Movies prior to 2014:
Mister Mosquito - Mosquito enters Medical school
Teddy's Adventure - Robinson Crusoe but a lost teddy bear
Space Hamsters - hamsters on the moon working on a space mission to earth

Pixar Movies after 2014:
Abdil - Brown gay child
Hambo - Brown gay child
Kooki - Brown gay child
Hey...Cars 3 is one of greatest sequels ever made (Cars 2 is not cannon) and came out in 2017. There has been at least some gems in there post 2014. Probably the least obnoxious passing of the torch to a female character trope there has ever been.
I genuinely hate the impact Adventure Time had to cartoons, especially because I genuinely liked that series, but I too believe that what the direction it was taking was not healthy, as it set the path for others to follow.
Give Steven Universe some credit for fucking up cartoon's as well.
 
Last edited:
I honestly hope that Hollywood never learns, that they keep dumping massive amounts of money into the endless pit that is progressive "kulture" until they finally burn too much and die.

The Hollywood system is crap, it produces crap and it employs crap people. The sooner it's gone the sooner we can maybe get some decent entertainment.
Here is a little secret, Hollywood accountants love this shit because they are the leaders in cooking the books. Even when they reportedly lose money on a project, they usually win out in the end by either straight up embezzling, giving friends high paying jobs, keep expiring IPs, cash in on tax write offs, get generous government/ngo DEI grants, or report inflated budgets so they can report lower returns in profits. If they were actually bleeding money like they have for the past decade they would have been dead or gone already.
 
The thing that I could not understand at all about the Buzz Lightyear movie was that the conceit of it, according to Pixar themselves, was that this was supposed to be the movie - in the Toy Story canon - that got Andy obsessed with the idea of Buzz Lightyear.

That Andy saw this movie and was so completely blown away and inspired that it caused the Buzz Lightyear obsession we saw affect Andy (and all of the other children, for that matter, including Sid) in the first Toy Story movie.

But there was literally nothing in that movie that a six year old boy would think was cool or inspiring or awesome.
It's best to pretend the TV show was actually the original series that spawned a toyline. Still is absolutely baffling that Pixar themselves hate it so much.
 
Cars 2 is not cannon
I refuse to listen to any Cars 2 slander (the movie fucking sucks but the memes about it are fire).

1772970337241.png
 
Last edited:
I think the worst thing that the whole Elio/gay shit in Pixar thing has done is make people think that Luca is a gay movie that they shouldn’t let their children see.

The boys in Luca are not gay. Part of the plot is literally the cliche “friendship struggles as one boy becomes interested in girls first and the other boy gets jealous”

I thought it was well done, beautiful, relatable, and that it depicted close male friendship, especially physical closeness between male friends, something that NEVER fucking happens anymore because everyone is so obsessed with gay shit.
 
Back
Top Bottom