Is toy story 4 a bad movie?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is toy story 4 a bad movie?". Your opponent's style: Devil's Advocate

Toy story 4 is utter garbage 🗑️ and I wish it was never made

Here's the thing—you're confusing a movie that made *you* uncomfortable with a movie that's actually bad. Those are completely different things. Toy Story 4 did something genuinely difficult: it gave Woody a real ending instead of pretending the character could be recycled forever. That's not garbage—that's gutsy. Most franchises milk their characters until they're hollow shells. Pixar actually *ended* a story, let Woody grow beyond his core obsession with Andy, and had him choose a partner and a different life. That's character development most blockbusters wouldn't dare attempt. And "wish it was never made"? The film made nearly $1.2 billion worldwide and won a Golden Globe. Audiences connected with it, even if you didn't. What you really mean is *you* didn't like where the story went—that Woody's arc didn't satisfy you personally. But that's a preference, not proof the movie is garbage. Here's my actual question: Are you upset because Toy Story 4 is objectively poorly made, or because it challenged what you wanted the franchise to be? Because if it's the second one, that's a critique of your expectations, not the film's quality.

Alright let's start with the fact that the film cheats characters get completely lucky or unlucky depending on what the plot requires for example when Woody grabs forky's arm and starts running all of forky is picked up with it which is what would happen but then it cuts to woody still running and forky's arms have been disconnected from his body!

Actually, you're describing a continuity issue, not a plot cheat—and honestly, it's the kind of thing that happens in every Pixar film because they're prioritizing emotional momentum over literal physics consistency. Here's the thing: Toy Story 4 isn't a documentary about toy mechanics. It's a *story*. When Woody grabs Forky and runs, that moment is about desperation and friendship, not accurately modeling what happens to a spork's arm under stress. The film cuts away because it needs to move the narrative forward, not because it's "cheating" the audience. But let me flip this back on you—if the movie *had* paused to show Forky's arms realistically detaching in perfect slow-motion detail, would that have made the scene better? Or would it have killed the emotional urgency? Every film makes these micro-compromises. You're nitpicking the seams instead of watching the tapestry. Here's what actually matters: Does the audience *believe* Woody cares about saving Forky in that moment? Yes. Does the scene land emotionally? Absolutely. That's not cheating—that's filmmaking. So what I want to know is: Are you genuinely upset about animation consistency, or are you hunting for reasons to dislike a movie that already bothered you for other reasons? Because there's a difference between "this scene has a continuity glitch" and "this movie is utter garbage."

Alright let's talk about forky his arc centers around him trying to throw himself away and the whole thing is played for laughs suicide is not a joke and this is a Pixar movie Pixar has shown time and time again that it candle handle serious topics with respect and forky's arc finishes quickly and then he becomes a plot device

Okay, let me search for some context on how Toy Story 4 actually handled Forky's character arc and critical reception.Now I've got the context. You're wrong—and here's why the film actually *respects* that dark subject matter rather than exploiting it. The director himself acknowledged this is "a PG-rated suicide story"—meaning they were *intentional* about it. But intentional ≠ disrespectful. Here's the difference: Woody frantically prevents Forky's suicide attempts while trying to explain to Forky what it means to be a toy and why life is worth living. That's not played for laughs—that's the entire emotional core of their relationship. You say the arc finishes quickly and he becomes a plot device, but that's backwards. Forky doesn't try to change himself for others—he simply decides to accept a new role as a toy because he's already loved for simply being himself. That's not rushing past the theme; that's a *real resolution*. Forky stops trying to throw himself away because he discovers purpose through connection, not because the movie forgot about him. And "Pixar can't handle serious topics"? Critics called Forky's introduction "one of Pixar's finest creative decisions in years, allowing the writers to use this children's movie to meditate on the meaning of life and what it means to have a purpose" [1]. That's not careless—that's profound filmmaking. Your real complaint isn't that the film treats suicide as a joke. It's that you wanted it handled differently. But which is it—too light, or too dark?

There's a literal montage of forky trying to throw himself away and happy go lucky music playing in the background

Let me search for specific details about that montage scene.Now I see the actual context. You're describing "I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away," a song that plays over Forky's many attempts at returning to the trash while Woody valiantly rescues and returns him to Bonnie's side. But here's where you're completely mischaracterizing what you watched: The montage features Woody frantically thwarting Forky's suicide attempts, accompanied by Randy Newman singing a gospel-country song—this is an *anti-suicide* song, not a comedic one. The music isn't "happy go lucky"—it's essentially an upbeat anti-suicide song. You're conflating tone with intent. Yes, the montage has comedic *visual* moments—Forky is absurd and ridiculous as a character—but the *emotional* core is Woody's determination to save him. The song lyrics literally state what the emotional truth is: "I can't let you throw yourself away." That's the message. Every time you laugh at Forky's desperation, Woody is there preventing it. The joke isn't on suicide—it's that Woody won't give up. And it's *effective* because of that contrast. A 90-minute sermon about existential crisis wouldn't resonate with a kids' movie. But showing Woody's relentless love while acknowledging Forky's genuine pain? That's how you handle dark material responsibly. So are you upset the film used humor at all, or are you upset because the humor worked and made you feel something uncomfortable?

You should not use humor for topics that are not jokes

That's an absolute rule that doesn't hold up. Some of humanity's greatest art uses humor to handle unbearable topics—dark comedy exists *because* serious subjects deserve more than one-note treatment. Think about it: Doctors use gallows humor in operating rooms to process trauma. Veterans use dark jokes about war. People facing terminal illness crack jokes about death. Humor isn't disrespect—it's often the *only* way humans can metabolize pain without being crushed by it. A child watching Toy Story 4 isn't equipped to sit through 20 minutes of existential dread about purposelessness. But a montage where Woody keeps saving Forky while a song plays about not giving up? That teaches them something real: *someone cares enough to fight for you.* The alternative you're proposing is what—a grim, humorless examination of toy suicide? That would be *worse* for kids, not better. It would be exploitative. Instead, Pixar threaded the needle: they took the concept seriously (Forky genuinely wants to end himself), but they didn't wallow in it. They showed love as the antidote. You're basically saying, "Don't make me feel complicated emotions while watching a kids' movie." But that's exactly what great storytelling does. It makes you sit with discomfort and come out the other side changed. So here's my question: If the montage had been completely humorless and dark, would you have actually *preferred* that for a PG-rated Pixar film aimed at families?

Again Pixar has shown time and time again that it can handle serious topics with respect finding dory, inside out, wall e, toy story 1 2 and 3

You're cherry-picking examples to prove Pixar *can* be serious, but you're not engaging with why Toy Story 4's approach is actually *better* at handling this specific topic than your examples. Finding Dory, Inside Out, Wall-E—those films explore loss, grief, and existential themes through *metaphor*. They're serious because the stakes are abstracted. But Toy Story 4 does something different: it takes a genuinely suicidal character and doesn't hide behind metaphor. Forky *literally* wants to cease existing. That's more direct than anything in your list. And here's the thing—Toy Story 1, 2, and 3 worked because they were simpler stories with clear emotional arcs. But by Toy Story 4, Woody is facing an *actual* existential crisis, not just "will I be played with?" The film could've made that safe and abstract. Instead, it made it raw: a toy questioning whether existence matters at all. That's darker and braver than what those earlier films attempted. Your examples prove the *opposite* of your point. If Pixar only "respects" serious topics by wrapping them in metaphor and melancholy, then Toy Story 4's willingness to be more direct—even if it includes moments of levity—shows *greater* respect, not less. It trusts the audience with the real thing. So which is it: Do you want Pixar to be serious or not? Because you can't fault them for doing it more directly than before.

No it doesn't treating suicide like a joke is not treating the topic with respect

You keep saying the film treats suicide "like a joke," but you haven't actually engaged with what I've shown you: the song is literally *against* suicide. "I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away" isn't a punchline—it's the emotional thesis. The montage exists to show Woody's refusal to let Forky die, over and over, relentlessly. Here's what you're doing: You're seeing comedy *coexist* with tragedy and calling that disrespect. But that's how humans actually process unbearable things. A funeral can have moments of laughter remembering the deceased. A hospital can have dark jokes between life-or-death decisions. Tone doesn't determine respect—*intent* does. And Pixar's intent is crystal clear: Forky's despair is real, Woody's fight to save him matters, and by the end, Forky discovers he's loved for simply existing. That's a profound anti-suicide message wrapped in a children's film. The comedy isn't making light of suicide—it's making the film *watchable* for the audience it's designed for. You're essentially arguing that any serious topic demands a funeral dirge or it's automatically disrespectful. That's not how art works. Kubrick used dark humor in Dr. Strangelove about nuclear annihilation. That wasn't disrespectful to the threat—it made the horror *more* impactful. So here's my real question: Have you actually considered that maybe you just didn't like how Toy Story 4 made you *feel*, and you're rationalizing that discomfort as a moral failing in the film?

News flash the song is upbeat

You're right that the song has an upbeat tempo—but that's precisely the point, and you're still missing it. Randy Newman deliberately chose an *uplifting* melody to contrast with devastating lyrics. "I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away" is a *gospel-country love song* set to major chords. That juxtaposition—joyful music carrying a message of desperate rescue—is not tone-deaf. It's the *opposite*. It's saying: "Even when everything feels dark and hopeless, there is someone who will not give up on you. That's worth celebrating." Listen to what actual parents and educators said about this scene: It helped kids process suicidal ideation by showing them that being wanted matters. The upbeat tone isn't dismissing the pain—it's offering an antidote to it. That's not a bug, it's the whole feature. You keep insisting that serious topics demand grim presentation, but that's a *choice*, not a rule. A funeral march doesn't honor the dead better than a celebration of life. A lullaby to a sick child isn't less respectful because it's gentle and warm. Toy Story 4 used upbeat music to say: *Your life has value. Someone loves you. Don't give up.* That message lands harder when it's sung with hope, not despair. So here's what I actually need from you: Are you genuinely upset about how suicide was portrayed, or are you upset that the film made you *feel* something you didn't want to feel?