Coco 2 Officially Confirmed By Pixar

Remember when Pixar changed animation forever with the bold, inventive, and otherwise creative “Toy Story?” How about when the studio continued to release original movies that pushed the medium of animation forward while exploring vastly different stories and genres (like “A Bug’s Life,” “Monsters, Inc.,” and “The Incredibles”)? Sure, there were sequels even in the earlier days, but not only did movies like “Toy Story 2” actually provide something new and different from their predecessors, but they were also balanced out by twice as many original Pixar movies.

Well, say goodbye to the good old days! Pixar, like its parent company Walt Disney Studios, is now all about chasing the mighty and elusive dollar with artistically-dubious sequels that parents will go to movie theaters to see because there is virtually nothing else to entertain kids with at the movies. We already knew Pixar was making not just another “Toy Story” sequelbut also a third “The Incredibles” movie. Now, the Disney CEO that refuses to leave, Bob Iger, has announced that “Coco 2” is in active development at Pixar and aiming for a 2029 theatrical release.

“While the film is just in the initial stages, we know it will be full of humor, heart and adventure,” Iger threatened promised in a press release. “And we can’t wait to share more soon.”

“Coco 2,” to be perfectly frank, is a terrible idea, more so than either “Toy Story 5” or “Incredibles 3.” Sure, it makes a lot of sense commercially. Like “Inside Out,” the original “Coco” was Pixar’s only true smash hit movie of the 2010s (a tumultuous decade that gave the studio its first proper box office bomb with “The Good Dinosaur”). And yet, while “Coco 2” could prove to be an enormous hit along the lines of “Inside Out 2,” the sequel risks severely diminishing the cultural impact and importance of its predecessor.

“Coco” was a marvelous film, a masterpiece even. It not only had stunning animation and production design, but also a marvelous story that perfectly portrayed Mexican culture and tradition. But “Coco” is definitely not a movie that lends itself to a sequel. After all, the movie’s title is itself a reference to a character that passes away at the end of the film. Will the sequel simply bring Mamá Coco back by revisiting her in the Land of the Dead? Will her great-grandson Miguel (Anthony Gonzalez) have to solve another mystery involving a secret relative?

The thing is, the story in “Coco” wasn’t merely about Miguel going on a big adventure. It was a movie about growing up, albeit one that didn’t readily lend itself to a continuation (even with Miguel’s upbringing once again at the focus). Rather, “Coco” told a singular, standalone story, complete with a mystery that was resolved and left absolutely no lingering questions nor teases for a followup to address. Story-wise, a “Coco” sequel reads about as creatively bankrupt on paper as Disney’s many, many direct-to-video sequels from the ’90s (like “An Extremely Goofy Movie” or “The Hunchback of Notre Dame II”).

There’s also the problem of what Disney and Pixar have been up to since the release of the original “Coco.” Though Disney’s press release says the sequel will bring back both director Lee Unkrich and co-director/co-writer Adrian Molina, it says nothing about the “Coco” songwriting team of Molina, Germaine Franco, Robert Lopez, and Kristen Anderson-Lopez. Will any of them return besides Molina? Will Disney try to change the style of the songs to be more “commercial” in the sequel? Will it dare bring in Lin-Manuel Miranda just because it can?

Frankly, it’s hard to imagine “Coco 2” being anywhere near the giant success “Coco” was creatively. But hey, as long as it makes some money, at least Disney will be happy…