Will Pixar ever top this? I just feel they'll never make

>>91853383
i mean, it was good, but it was needlessly ugly. that prevents it from being the right kind of classic, long-term. nobody is going to buy merchandise with those twisted creatures' visages on it, the way they want the princesses or, let's be honest, all the non-princess characters from movies what have princesses in them.. like especially the villains.. and that's not even getting into the lions and shit.

>>91853588
I liked the art style desu

>needlessly ugly
You mean you don't like the character designs? The film isn't ugly at all.

>>91853588
>needlessly ugly

Literally the first time I've ever seen this opinion.

>>91853588
>something needs to sell merchandise to be good

Actually fuck yourself.

File: remyp.jpg (36KB, 500x666px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x666px

>>91853588
Are you kidding? These are probably the cutest cartoon rat designs I've seen

File: 32322.jpg (52KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x750px

They already have

>>91853908
well you're entitled to your taste preferences of course, but you at least acknowledge how different it is in style compared to the other disney classics, right? you can see how people who prefer that would find this offputting

>>91853964
no, it needs to sell merchandise to, as OP put it, have a gem like it be made again
>>91853997
uh, no. you've seen rats of nimh, splinter, great mouse detective, rescuers, chip n' dale.. dozens of other much nicerlooking rodents

>>91853997
I've seen cuter cartoon rats before.

>>91854010
Was shit.

>>91854010
He said top it.

Ratatouille is and will likely always be Pixar's crowning achievement and finest work.