Is it a goal for Pixar to make people cry?

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Yeah, the title feels a bit like clickbait, but the thought struck me when reading how choked up Tom Hanks was when doing Toy Story 4, and had trouble getting through the movie's last scene.
And after Up people on discussion boards kept telling how much they cried during its intro (I only became aware of this after I had seen it myself).

It is said that Dan Scanlon upcoming Pixar movie will be a "real tearjerker".

For Lasseter, the essential mix of entertainment and emotion are at the core of Pixar's work. "Walt Disney always said, 'For every laugh, there should be a tear.' I believe in that."

While I don't mind emotional scenes as long as they are an essential part of the plot, I'm not sure what I feel about them getting so much priority (or at least that's the way media makes it look).

[Farerb]

Yes, I think it is their goal since Up. However it feels very tired and forced in my opinion.

[Sotiris]

Yes, I think it is their goal since Up. However it feels very tired and forced in my opinion.

Ditto. The real problem is that the public has become addicted to it. They not only expect it from Pixar but from all animated films now. A live-action movie can scare you, inspire you, intellectually stimulate you but if an animated movie doesn't make you cry, it's no good. It lacks substance and depth. That expectation forces filmmakers in animation to keep pushing for "heartfelt" scenes even when they don't fit into the movie, often resulting in cheap sentimentality.

[DisneyFan09]

I'm not trying to be condescending, but that tearjearking moment has been pretty much become one of Pixar's definite trademarks lately. Though they certainly has made emotional films priorly (Toy Story 2, anyone?), it was after Up and Toy Story 3 they were stuck with that rut of having the big, tearjearking moment. Even their "comeback"-film Inside Out had one such moment and even Brave had it, but it became labeled as being inferior to those others moments (mostly due to how Brave was being received). Which I don't really see why, because I found that moment even more heartwrenching.

Ditto. The real problem is that the public has become addicted to it. They not only expect it from Pixar but from all animated films now. A live-action movie can scare you, inspire you, intellectually stimulate you but if an animated movie doesn't make you cry, it's no good. It lacks substance and depth. That expectation forces filmmakers in animation to keep pushing for "heartfelt" scenes even when they don't fit the movie, often resulting in cheap sentimentality.

Fair enough, but sentimentality has been in animated movies since the dawn of time. Though of course not every single animated movie had it, at least many of them does. Remember it all began with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, which was at the time really praised for it, to having the audience crying for an animated character (which was really a big thing at the time, contradicting the naysayers). And yes, as much as I hate to say this, remember that it was even John Lasseter's mantra, that "he loved that for every laugh there was a tear" (a mantra that was carried from Walt himself).

Otherwise, I agree with your theories. An movie can certainly have substance and depth without being over the top sappy, but since substance has been labeled with sentimentality, it's been perceived as otherwise. I remember that several CGI animated comedies who came from the period after Shrek 2 were pretty much absent of sentimentality, but that became the trend after Shrek, to have the blatant, in-your-face comedy (regardless of Shrek having it's moments of drama and pathos). But personally I know about heartfelt moments in live action movies that feels even more forced and cheap than what an animated movie does.

[Kyle]

Their goal is to make you feel. There is no happiness without sadness or even tragedy.

[Rumpelstiltskin]

As long as it feels natural instead of forced, or it become a standard formula. Otherwise everybody has a point.
As for spesific goals; if I was in the movie business, my goal would be to entertain people and give the audience a good time, with or without tearjerking scenes. One of the difference between movies and real life is (in my opinion) that it is fully possible to make happy films without tragedy.

[Disney Duster]

I don't see a problem with wanting every film to make you cry. I read what you all said and I just don't think it's a bad thing at all.

[Mickeyfan1990]

I had a feeling when someone would ask this question. To me, no. All Pixar's goal is to make a good movie and that's it.

[Wonderlicious]

Sentimentality does sell, and I think the staff at Pixar have realised this. Ultimately, I think the issue is perhaps more Pixar being a bit conservative with their storytelling and filmmaking as of late (along with the rest of Hollywood, to be honest) more than anybody being cynically manipulative and sadistic. I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with being sentimental so long as it is done right (when it's done wrong, it can indeed be really embarrassing). I think people in general like films with wistful or tear-jerking moments in them as it's a safe surrounding to explore emotions and let tension out. I remember listening to a BBC radio documentary that explored why people listen to sad music, and a psychological theory behind it was that it was a safe environment to explore emotions and get them out (i.e. hearing a sad song and shedding a few tears won't have many repercussions, whereas having a relative die or being dumped would).

[Disney Duster]

But making movies is all about making people feel sad, then happy. Walt Disney wanted that for every film, too.

[Nandor]

After seeing Coco yesterday, I'll say yes, they're actively trying to make you cry.
Multiple scenes were extremely drawn out for no discernable reason other than making people cry. It got to the point of annoyance, both the ammount of tearjerking scenes and their none-too-subtle execution.
It's been a problem in past films, but Coco made it far too obvious.

[Disney Duster]

How many tear-jerking scenes were there really? I only cried at one.

[Rose Dome]

I reckon their goal is to make People feel all emotions. Tearjerking scenes have become more intense but I imagine that's an effort to retain more critical appreciation than an increasingly thoughtful Dreamworks