Skip to main content

Toy Story's Epilogue Remains Delightful and Profound


A sequel to Toy Story 3 always felt like a remarkably bad idea. There are only a few perfect movie trilogies: The Lord of the Rings, the Apu trilogy, the Before trilogy, possibly the original Star Wars trilogy, and the Toy Story trilogy. Despite being made years apart (eleven between the second and third), they really felt like one story tied together through an increasingly evolving theme about growing up, which meant something so powerful for those of us who grew up with the series. Toy Story 3 was the perfect conclusion, ending with one of the most beautifully bittersweet closures of a movie series in recent memory. Nine years later though, Toy Story 4 comes to cinemas, directed by up-and-coming Pixar animator Josh Cooley, attempting to continue the story. It’s a monumental task to match up, and the movie doesn’t. But it is a very worthy addendum to the series, and specifically for the character of Woody.
Two years after Andy donated his toys to the little girl Bonnie, Woody (Tom Hanks) is a bit forlorn that Bonnie hasn’t been playing with him much in the lead-up to starting kindergarten. When she becomes enamoured with a toy she made out of a spork called Forky (Tony Hale) who believes he’s just trash, Woody tries to convince him of his worth while on a road trip with Bonnie’s family. When Woody and Forky are separated from the other toys, they run afoul of an antique doll called Gabby Gabby (Christina Hendricks) and reunite with Woody’s lost love interest Bo Peep (Annie Potts), while Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) mounts a search for them.
This movie has a big and impressive cast. In addition to Hanks and Allen, mainstays Joan Cusack, Wallace Shawn, John Ratzenberger, Blake Clark, and Estelle Harris are back, as well as Kristen Schaal, Jeff Garlin, Timothy Dalton, and Bonnie Hunt as Bonnie’s toys introduced in the last film. Hale is a welcome addition, as is Hendricks, who plays her character with a surprising amount of pathos. Key and Peele reunite as a pair of comic relief carnival toys, and Keanu Reeves is an absolute scene-stealer as a Canadian Evel Knievel style action figure called Duke Caboom. And keep an open ear for cameos from Carol Burnett, Carl Reiner, Betty White, and Mel Brooks. But with so many characters, some are bound to be neglected, which is sadly the case for the secondary toys. Especially after the prominent theme of unity and family togetherness in Toy Story 3, it’s rather disappointing that most of the long-running characters don’t get much of anything to do. Cusack’s Jessie in particular, the heart of Toy Story 2 and one of the series’ best characters, is vastly underutilized when there’s little reason she couldn’t have been a bigger part of the story.
In fact the appropriate phrase for most of the problems with this movie is “missed opportunity”. The premise is that Bonnie’s family is on a road trip, yet the only real setting is a small-town fair, giving the movie a scale that feels more like one of the Toy Story TV specials. Forky’s existential crisis could have been explored in greater detail, possibly as a mirror to Buzz’s in the first movie; the question of what really makes a toy is right there, but little is done with it. However among these disappointments, the film succeeds exponentially in other areas. It deals with its villain in a wholly different way than any of the other movies by really honing in on their point of view and feelings. It maturely tackles the notion of purpose in life, with Woody at a crossroads as an old toy well aware that nothing lasts forever -speaking to older audiences perhaps better than any Toy Story movie yet. And most importantly the movie does justice by a character the series has largely ignored since 1999.
After having been a significant supporting character in Toy Story, the porcelain Bo Peep was moved to the margin of Toy Story 2, and written out entirely from Toy Story 3, which I’ve always felt was unfair to a likeable, funny character who was one of the few female voices in the series. But Toy Story 4 not only fills in the gap of her story, it gives her a major role in the narrative that completely redeems all of that. Bo’s adventurous, sharp, and resourceful personality is almost as much fun as Potts’ enthusiastic performance, clearly relishing the chance to play a starring role for a change. And it’s her exuberant presence that facilitates the ultimate arc for Woody, not just of this movie but the whole series.
The story of of these films is more or less the story of Woody (Buzz has been the star of the subplots since the second film). He’s grown a lot as a character -where once he was extremely jealous and petty at being replaced as a kids’ favourite toy, now he openly advocates and encourages Forky in that status. The movies have been his journey through accepting change, coming to terms with his mortality, and learning to move on. And this movie addresses what comes after moving on. Can he face a future of just watching another child grow up? What is his role as a toy? Can he always be there for a kid, and how much does that kid need him, really? This movie brings up a lot of the same themes as Toy Story 2 but it comes to a different conclusion, and one that really feels appropriate and earned. If it is indeed the final Toy Story film, it brings Woody’s story to a satisfying end. And though it’s not as emotionally wrought as the whole last act of Toy Story 3, it is really touching, especially to everyone who first met this cowboy doll decades ago. It should be said too, that Hanks is doing some of the best work he’s ever done as this character here.
Francis Ford Coppola called The Godfather Part III an epilogue to the story told in the first two films, and that’s exactly what Toy Story 4 is (though a better movie than The Godfather Part III). It’s not of the same calibre as its predecessors -it’s story feels less compelling, it doesn’t know what to do with most of its returning characters (even Buzz feels unusually naive and useless), and some of the comedy fails in that same wild, swinging-for-the-fences way as Finding Dory. But its’ strengths are such that it works as a nice afterthought, like a more interesting version of the final chapter of the last Harry Potter book. If the Toy Story trilogy is about growing up, Toy Story 4 is about being grown up, rediscovering oneself, and making the difficult choices that come from that. Don’t let it be said Pixar doesn’t know their audience. 

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more