2026 Oscar-Nominated Animated Shorts

James Rosario: As is often the case, this year's Oscar-nominated animated shorts inject a bit of whimsy into the mostly dour short film programs, and I have to say, I rather enjoyed the 2026 entries. In their own unique ways, each film presented a fully realized world, strong characters, and complete three-act structures.

Certainly some were more "serious" than others, but I wholly enjoyed all five films on one level or another. They may not change the world, but it's refreshing to see such an impressive showcase of well-crafted visual storytelling in what is often a dismissed category. Please tell me I'm not alone in this opinion.

Edwin Arnaudin: I'm somewhat in agreement with you, but the program order had me doubtful even over the halfway point. With the exception of the ugly stop-motion animation of "The Girl Who Cried Pearls," they all have appealing visuals. But the dialogue-free "The Three Sisters" is such a lark that it's a bit depressing beautiful design of this level was used in its service. And the likewise no-talk (not that there’s anything wrong with that) "Forevergreen" sports a phenomenal tactile style, yet its Diet "Giving Tree" tale is similarly empty and frustrating with unearned payoffs. After the ludicrous, pandering "Pearls," I feared this would go down as the worst batch of animated shorts so far, but things got better.

Forevergreen (Image courtesy of Roadside Attractions)

Bruce Steele: "Three Sisters" did nothing for me visually or in storytelling. Its dialogue-free approach didn't bother me, but I found it so uninvolving that I started asking myself questions about the plausibility of this island world — it's preposterous without being interesting — which is not something an animator wants from his audience.

I agree that "Pearls" was visually offputting, and the story didn't make much sense to me either. (If there was a three-act structure, it went over my head.)

Y'all will not be surprised that I found the comforting simplicity and sweetness of "Forevergreen" charming, and it has by far the most appealing design. I love its back story too: It was created by dozens, if not hundreds, of animation professionals volunteering their time. (Full disclosure: Some are friends of mine.)

I'll let someone else weigh in first on "Butterfly," the current favorite because of its powerful true story. I'll just say that I would have preferred almost any animation style to it gloppy, primitive-looking overpainting technique.

James: "Pearls" was certainly off-putting from a visual standpoint, but that's one of the things I liked about. It reminded me of when I first saw the music video for Tool's "Sober" way back in the early '90s (this is NOT an endorsement of Tool) — it's purposefully gross, and to me that's strangely endearing. However, "Pearls" also had the most disappointing ending of the bunch which all but ruined my enjoyment of the story up to that point.

For my money, "Butterfly" is a lock for taking home the trophy. Its challenging but meaningful story was easily the most powerful of the all the entrants, but I agree with Bruce about the animation style. I found the constantly shifting visuals distracting and sometimes unclear, which diminished the potency of the tale. But, even with that said, I still think it's going home with the gold.

Butterfly (Image courtesy of Roadside Attractions)

Edwin: I was pretty mesmerized by the painter's palette style of "Butterfly," but can see how it could grow tedious. And I agree that its narrative is the most profound and moving of the bunch, which gives it a great shot at winning. (Nazis suck!)

For a minute, I thought it might be the only nominee with something meaningful to say. "Retirement Plan" gets off to a humorous start as an elderly man lists off all the things he'll finally do once he's no longer working, accompanied by quick visualizations of him carrying out these actions as well as playful narration by Domhall Gleeson. Before long, this silly story has grown quite moving, and the ambiguity of whether it's all actually happening to the man or just in his imagination is fun to ponder. This strong finish brought the program up to a C-plus for me.

Did that one work for y'all?

Bruce: I quite enjoyed “Retirement Plan.” It’s clever and visually engaging, and Gleeson’s narration is spot on. It helps that it’s universally “relatable,” as studio executives like to say.

That said, I felt about that one the way you guys felt about “Forevergreen”: Is this rich enough for Oscar consideration? Still, I’d rate it above “Pearls” and “Sisters.” And I’ve made my piece with “Butterfly” winning for subject matter over artistry. (Nazis suck!) Perhaps my dislike of that short’s style is just my own shortcoming. Overall, I’ll give the five-short program a B-minus.

James: I also enjoyed "Retirement Plan." In all honesty, it was probably my favorite of the bunch but I doubt it has enough gravitas to win over "Butterfly." As I said in the beginning, I think this collection of shorts is the strongest in the three categories. It's an easy B for me.

Grade: B-minus. Not rated but with adult themes and language.

(Photo of Retirement Plan courtesy of Roadside Attractions)