A Boy, a Dream, a Flicker of Stardust
On June 20, 2025, basking in the warm torrent of summer sunlight, people were supposed to fly with a green-painted, bright-eyed lad by the name of Elio Solís. With offbeat charm and wide-eyed enchantment, Elio wished not for glory nor wealth, but to drift among the stars—be taken for Earth's interstellar ambassador. He spent his afternoons on sun-warmed beaches building intricate cardboard spaceships, coloring rough star charts, and gazing up at the sky, full of cosmic optimism. His life was subdued, tiny—but in the resonant emptiness of space, he envisioned possibility.
Elio was visually stunning. Pixar veteran production designer Harley Jessup and VFX supervisor Claudia Chung Sanii worked together to design the "Communiverse"—an alien universe of shining translucency and weightlessness wonder. They superimposed VR and macro fluid simulations in water tanks, oil, and glitter, catching shining currents and floating forms that seemed alien and hypnotically lovely. The lighting department employed Pixar's new Luna toolset to create images evoking Spielbergian sci-fi—nostalgic references to E.T. and Close Encounters—but updated with kaleidoscopic color and rich glow .
The Big Screen Beckons—But the Theater Doors Don't Swing Wide
Pixar unleashed Elio in a daring cinematic bid—a $150 million animated extravaganza, expected to open somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 million at home from 3,750 theaters. But echoing Elemental (2023), the launch fell miserably short: only $20.8 million in the US and $14 million elsewhere—$35 million total worldwide, an all-time Pixar low.
Industry observers were stunned. Variety, Emarketer, and Business Insider all reported that Elio's opening was Pixar's "worst opening ever". With a budget of $150 million—and possibly higher if advertising is counted—it had about $375 million in total box office to break even. With early returns on par with half of that, the dive seemed instantaneous.
Even the critics were taken aback—Elio earned fair acclaim: 83–85% on Rotten Tomatoes, a 91% audience score, and a domesticated "A" CinemaScore. But good vibes did not equal box office success—a common trend in pandemic-era original movies, in which prequel nostalgia and franchise comfort reign supreme.
Why Didn't It Stick?
1. Franchise Fatigue & Familiarity Bias
Pixar's own success has worked against it: sequels now take off (Inside Out 2 alone grossed $1.7 B globally), while originals fail. Audiences, habituated by Disney+ and recollection, still prefer the familiar to the new. Without the draw of an established franchise, Elio was a stranger in a busy summer schedule.
Universal's How to Train Your Dragon remake drew in $37 million, and 28 Years Later knighted a $30 million opening—both visually engaging and brand-conscious. Elio, dashing and new, got lost in the background.
2. Poor Marketing & Low Awareness
While Pixar quietly established little activations in Disney parks and social handles, the wider marketing blitz seemed underwhelming. Coverage on X remarked at a "lackluster" promotional push—trailers were sparse, digital ads minimal, and the film just didn't break through the wider cultural conversation. At just 30–40% of average campaign reach, public awareness was low—tellingly, theaters were half-empty.
3. Genre Drift & Artistic Conservatism
Critics observed Elio's visuals were gorgeous—but stylistically conservative. Even with Pixar's technical expertise, the character designs tipped toward a recognizable "CalArts" look: curvy bodies, diffused lighting, golden color schemes—cozy but derivative. In a world post-Spider-Verse and desperate for bold stylistic innovation, the appearance of Elio looked like déjà vu.
Disney's hand, of course, was apparent as well. Creative struggles and changing vectors—perhaps to reach family crowds—left Elio less defined. Even among the studio hallways, internal tension brewed—test screenings hadn't ignited enthusiasm, and marketing tracks were erased and re-drafted. The film's very core was lost in the maelstrom of caution.
---
✂️ Hidden Heartbeats: The Lost Queer-Coded Story
A Director's Vision
Fundamentally, Elio was never as much a sci-fi caper as it was. Born out of the imagination of Adrian Molina—the openly gay co-director of Coco—it was designed to be a sensitive exploration of identity, self-expression, and the stifled pain of not belonging.
Molina's youthful vision had been sweet, understated queerness—Elio's room full of posters of a boy he fancied, morning rituals that whispered disobedience, and a fanciful "trash-ion show" in which he had created a pink tank top out of driftwood, prancing around in glee. All of these would have added emotional resonance to his otherness—and, later, his acceptance in the Communiverse.
The Sanding Down
But when 2023 test screenings didn't catch fire—particularly no indication of ticket-buying interest—Pixar executives apparently freaked out. Management intervened. They cut out the pink tank display case, eliminated the bedroom posters, and basically castrated the sugar that made Elio authentic.
Former Pixar assistant editor Sarah Ligatich, of PixPride, explained that she was "deeply saddened and aggrieved by the changes". One artist informed The Hollywood Reporter, "The Elio that is in theaters right now is far worse than Adrian's best version of the original".
These artistic hemorrhages prompted a cascading collapse. Molina left in protest (ultimately passing on a co-director invitation), various LGBTQ+ staff departed as well, and artistic restaffing brought tone changes—more traditional, less risky.
Echoes Across Disney
This was not a one-off. Previous edits to a trans plot line in Pixar's Win or Lose, as well as pressure on Inside Out 2 to "be less gay," indicate a trend of suppressing LGBTQ+ nuance—sometimes prior to public outcry hardens. Appeased beforehand, studios chip away at representation under market pressures.
---
The Ripple Effect: Why Representation Matters
Thoe little details, such as giving a young hero a feeling of belonging, are important things in animation. Images—from the pink tank wave to the look shared towards a bedroom crush—are quietly speaking to LGBTQ+ kids and families in search of themselves.
The stripping of these layers leaves Elio a technically brilliant but emotionally vacant relic—visually stunning, but emotionally flat. In erasing the soft queer core, Pixar might have undermined both its emotional resonance and its appeal.
Part 2: Echoes in the Stars — The Fallout and Future of Elio
🎬 Scene-by-Scene: What Was Lost in Translation?
🚀 Opening Sequence — “The Ambassador Has Landed”
The original opening—based on insider leaks—was meant to play with identity immediately. Elio, misunderstood at school and lonely at home while his mother Gloria ran classified missions, stumbles upon a swirling beam of light thinking it's a drone. But rather than fear, he waves flamboyantly, joking: “Oh great, I’m finally being abducted—and I’m in pajamas.”
In the final cut, the delivery is toned down. The wardrobe is muted. That sense of gentle queerness—a boy who’s expressive, performative, curious—has been sanitized into eccentricity. He's still “weird,” but never “different.”
👽 Communiverse Courtroom — “Earth Sent Us… Him?”
Originally, the intergalactic council’s confusion about Elio’s role was layered with subtext—misreading his gestures, giggling at his open tone. In Molina’s cut, one alien was meant to fall in love with Elio, echoing classic rom-com tropes with alien absurdism. This subplot was cut entirely.
Instead, the film doubles down on comedic misunderstandings and slapstick visuals. Gone is the romantic tension. What remained was whimsy, but without heart.
💫 Stardust Scene — The Almost Confession
The most heartbreaking omission, reportedly, is a moment where Elio opens up to a fellow “Exo-child”—a crystalline, sentient creature from a war-torn moon—about feeling like he doesn’t fit in anywhere. The original script had lines like:
> “Sometimes I try to act more… normal. Like what they want. But it feels like shrinking my whole self.”
In the final film, the dialogue is vague, reduced to "It’s hard being misunderstood." The vulnerability is still there—but fogged, made non-specific. That deliberate ambiguity erases the power of recognition.
🗣️ Fan Reactions: A Universe of What-Ifs
When Elio flopped, film Twitter (now X) didn’t mourn the story’s ambition—but rather, what could have been. Critics called it “a half-born constellation” and “a glittering missed opportunity.”
🔥 On Reddit:
r/Animation:
> “The movie wants to say something. But it's like someone erased the message halfway through.”
r/LGBTfilm:
> “This was our Luca in space. And they snuffed it.”
🎥 On YouTube:
Film essayists released 10+ explainer videos comparing the leaked original storyboard with what ended up in theaters. One viral video titled “Elio Wasn’t Allowed to Be Queer” hit 1.3 million views within a week.
💬 Critics’ Lines:
The AV Club:
> “Pixar takes a bold premise, smooths its edges, and sells us stardust without soul.”
Vulture:
> “If Coco sang a proud ballad of selfhood, Elio hums it behind closed doors.
🎯 Branding Damage: What This Means for Pixar
Pixar, once the bastion of creative risk (Up, Wall-E, Soul), is now accused of playing safe. The public perception has shifted:
Year Original Film Box Office Studio Reception
2020 Soul Moderate Critical darling
2021 Luca Streaming only Cult love
2023 Elemental Weak open, slow burn success Word-of-mouth win
2025 Elio Flop Mixed reviews, queer erasure allegations
Disney’s corporate reshuffling after Bob Iger’s return created instability—especially in Pixar, where layoffs followed the Lightyear loss. Amid fears of streaming-dominated strategy collapse, Pixar was pressured to return to “guaranteed winners.” Hence, greenlighting sequels like Toy Story 5, Inside Out 2, and pushing original voices to the backburner.
💣 Public Backlash + Internal Fracture
The press around Elio’s cuts unleashed a storm:
LGBTQ+ employees from PixPride reportedly resigned or went quiet.
Adrian Molina, who refused a co-director recredit after the changes, has not spoken publicly.
Fans launched a petition for a “director’s cut” which has 70,000+ signatures as of July 2025.
Pixar’s social media post—“Support Original Stories”—was meant to encourage viewership. But many found it ironic, responding with:
> “Then let your directors tell their stories.”
🧭 Can Elio Still Find Its Orbit?
The honest answer? Maybe. Elemental was written off after its opening—only to cross $500 million globally thanks to family word-of-mouth and international love. Elio might follow that trajectory… if given a chance.
Streaming Rescue?
A re-release on Disney+ (expected September 2025) could introduce the film to wider audiences. If marketing includes any hint of what was meant to be, curiosity could spike.
Potential Redemption Paths:
1. Director’s Cut (even just storyboards + commentary)
Like Justice League: Snyder Cut, fan pressure could lead to a bonus edition.
2. Companion Book or Art Book with Original Drafts
Publish Molina’s full vision with sketches, interviews, and storyboards.
3. Sequel or Series Spin-Off
A Communiverse Chronicles series exploring queer-coded alien characters might reclaim what was lost.
4. Festival Circuit Revival
A re-edited version shown at LGBTQ+ and animation festivals (Outfest, Annecy) could earn critical reappraisal.
✨ What Elio Teaches Us
Animation isn’t just for kids. It’s one of the most powerful tools for teaching empathy. Pixar, at its best, has always known this.
But Elio became a mirror not of identity—but of institutional fear. The lesson isn't only about queerness or box-office numbers. It’s about creative courage. Audiences don’t crave perfect stories—they crave honest ones.
A Final Thought:
> “If you’re going to send someone to speak for Earth… shouldn’t it be the one who always felt most alien?”
Elio, in all his misunderstood glory, deserved to be that voice. Maybe, someday, we’ll hear it again.