Hoppers

2026

Before Pixar brings us the FIFTH installment of Toy Story, they have released Hoppers. The film feels like minor Pixar to me, but it’s not bad. In some ways, it’s your basic Pixar film (in good ways), and in some ways it’s quite different (in good ways). But do I have reservations? Thank you for asking, and yes, I do.

Remember that dumb television show, Zoo? Or John Hodgman’s brilliant pitch for All Animals Vs. All Humans? This is that, in a smaller container. Kathy Najimy’s Dr. Beth creates a way to remotely pilot a lifelike animal robot with one’s mind. They call it “hopping,” and it is full of just-don’t-ask logic gaps, such as how they explain it as putting a human brain into an animal robot…which would be even crazier. A nineteen-year-old animal rights fan is fighting to save the glade where she spent her childhood from Jon Hamm’s Basic Evil Mayor and his Basic Evil Beltway. She, of course, hijacks a beaver bot and goes off-grid in her pursuit of justice. Discovering that she can understand and speak to every species of animal (just-don’t-ask), she quickly finds a place among the forest animals, feeling like they give her the respect and authority that humans withhold from her. Being an angry nineteen-year-old, her tactics for “saving the glade” (you WILL get sick of that phrase very quickly) go awry, though, and she ignites that animal-human war I mentioned.

What works? As usual with Pixar, the emotional story is strong. The narrative races, however, which may be good or bad for the brains of kids raised online. The story tackles the real questions and problems of Right Now, like shortsighted, rage-led leadership and overcompensating for a feeling of helplessness by fixating on a tiny thing while disregarding the big picture. The heroes aren’t all heroic, and the villains—well, the human villain (Hamm)—is not all villainous, which is refreshing after the initial Mayor vs. Nature setup. There is some good humor, and the characters are very well drawn. Bobby Moynihan’s Mammal King is especially good, as is Meryl Streep’s Insect Queen. This may be Pixar’s most frightening flick, with some really creepy images and lots of real danger. Which, again, can be a plus or minus.

Where are the loose wires? They show up in the seams. The film’s nature/science focus doesn’t connect well to its super cartoony animals. (The humans are standard-issue Pixar.) These guys look like Brad Bird asked ChatGPT to show him “CGI animals.” So, while it feels like you could/should be picking up cool nature facts, you’re really just dealing with the cutest of Disney pals. Yes, it’s fun kiddie sci-fi, but the biosphere stuff should be realistic, therefore letting the robots be far-fetched. However, there are definite moments when all pretense of reality dies. The movie jumps that particular shark about halfway through…or the shark jumps it. Also, the connection between the two plots (girl meets animals/animals attack humans) is not strong, and the shift happens swiftly and irrevocably.

And that’s the good and bad of it. The film itself is neither. It’s a mixture of elements, some of which work and some of which do not. Film criticism should very rarely boil down to “good movie” or “bad movie.” Just like mayors, beavers, and teenagers, films don’t exist in those extreme categories often. I enjoyed Hoppers, but I rolled my eyes a couple times, laughed a few times, and ultimately decided it needed a stronger title. Will kids happily accept it at face value? I’m sure they will. But adults might want fewer just-don’t-ask moments.