Disney is re-releasing eight movies into theaters for the anniversary
 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
|
Disney is re-releasing eight movies into theaters for the anniversary
Disney is re-releasing eight movies into theaters for the anniversary
|
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
|
Coco and Moana are too new.
>100th anniversary of the company
>Zero films before 1991
>>Zero films before 1991
It's weird how much "shorter" the legacy of Disney feels now compared to when I was growing up.
The want to pretend everything before 1990 ever existed because it’s either a dark age lull or “problematic” for their ESG ass
They still have merch lying around for those
These are either relatively new or had restorations done since they were released in 3D not that long ago. So films that were already good to go for modern theater screens.
They're intentional trying to appeal to millennials and early zoomers, they have the most spending power at the moment, boomers and earlier (aka those waiting for the grave) aren't purchasing much anymore
>They're intentional trying to appeal to millennials and early zoomers, they have the most spending power at the moment
Weird, I hear they can barely afford rent and student loans. Doesn't seem like young adults would be wasteful with money.
That's literally a third of their history though.
Coco and Moana are surprising.
Would expect Ratatouille/Up and Aladdin.
Or one of the older films like Sleeping Beauty, Alice in Wonderland, or Pinocchio. Hell Fantasia on the big screen would've been nice.
Aladdin's a no-no film now. Same with Pinocchio and Fantasia. Would not be surprised if Sleeping Beauty internally is one too since Aurora explicitly mensions she's 16.
Most people don't care about Alice.
*Mentions
I thought Alice merch tends to sell really well?
Maybe it's just at the parks. Regardless I'd figure they'd toss a bone to one of the older films.
People like the designs of the characters and nonsense themes, but nobody really gives a crap about the movie.
If they did, we'd have more good r34 of the main character since that movie checks off a few fetishes.
Yes, I'm salty
>Aladdin's a no-no film now
Which is hilarious, because I've never heard any outcry from the Muslim community about Aladdin. But Pocahontas, the film that is ACTUALLY problematic and has received massive amounts of criticism from Native American communities, doesn't even have the disclaimer thing before the movie if you watch it on Disney Plus.
Arabian Nights did catch fire when Aladdin first came out in theaters with a "They'll cut off your ears if they don't like your face" lyric that was replaced by "Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense" when it hit home video.
The Disney Plus disclaimer is actually moronic and seems to solely mean "non-whites in films before 1995"
It's been over 3 years and people still are trying to figure out why Three Caballeros has this disclaimer
>But Pocahontas, the film that is ACTUALLY problematic and has received massive amounts of criticism from Native American communities, doesn't even have the disclaimer thing before
In the culture war, Native Americans only matter as a bludgeon white people use in fights over the things that white people care about.
White people don't care about Pocahontas, so it doesn't get the disclaimer. White people DO care about Aladdin, because of childhood nostalgia.
>Aladdin's a no-no film now.
No it isn't, they had a live-action film just four years ago
And even that live-action film has a warning in front of it.
The live action films try to "fix" the older films.
That's why you have shit like Pinocchio getting served root beer unstead of alcohol on Pleasure Island (and even then being hesitant about it), or Belle in the remake being so super extra quirky and smart besides just a nerd so the captive romance doesn't... Objectify her or whatever they call that shit.
Besides the lyric in Arabian Nights, a lit of the Twittersphere homosexuals said the film was using "westernized beauty standards" or some shit. Shit like Aladdin's smooth face compared to most of the villains/antagonists having black beards.
Some paranoid homosexuals also think Jafar was supposed to be gay-coded because he's slender, but nobody outside the most hardcore of Twatter homosexuals cares since he obviously has a cobra motif in his design.
It's a moronic accusation against the original, but outrage homosexuals are moronic.
What's objectionable about Fantasia?
I'm guessing he means the Chinese mushrooms and African centaurs. But I doubt that's the reason. I'm sure these movie choices have been specially researched for what audiences are most-interested in, long in advance.
I'm pretty sure this part has been out since the 1960s anyway.
Aren’t there a few Chinese stereotype centaurettes that never got removed?
Not one black person in the lot of them.
Good. They're learning.
Frozone
>barely in the fricking movie
Good. He knows his place. The background.
I know lion king dosen't have any black characters but it does take place in africa no?
The baboon.
You're the reason why people strawman criticism at Disney
Whoa, they figured a way to actually make emergency money.
Except for Coco and probably Moana, I guess.
>100 years of Disney
>almost half the list is Pixar
>one live action movie for some fricking reason
No seriously what the frick is this list?
>Frozen and Toy Story have announced sequels in development
>The Rock's live action Moana remake
>Pirates might be worth looking into revisiting now that Depp is cleared
>The best princess movie of the Renascence era
>One last attempt at cashing in on superheroes before the fad finally dies
>Obligatory other culture representation from Coco and Lion King
>furgays are now a race
We’ve fallen
>Obligatory other culture representation
>Lion King
More likely because it's one of their beloved hits.
And maybe I'm just not pozzed enough, but I guess it had nothing they'd consider "problematic" now?
>And maybe I'm just not pozzed enough, but I guess it had nothing they'd consider "problematic" now?
Almost all of the white people roles from the original animated movie (and, no, Seth Rogen doesn't count for obvious reasons) were replaced with "African" voice actors for the live action version. Despite being a movie where no humans exist and the wildlife composition looks more at home in an American zoo than an actual savanna, Disney has been trying to push The Lion King as "African culture" for a while now. That's why it remains one of their big marketing tools, not anything to do with its quality.
>Renascence
>not thinking Aladdin is the best
>The Rock's live action Moana remake
I was wondering why they chose the inferior 2016 animated Disney movie, but that actually makes sense.
I WILL be angry about not being able to watch Zootopia in the theater again, though.
The upperclasses are starting to get desperate. Your turn.
DESPERATE
Would be far more exciting if they did one-weekend only showings of culty Disney films like Atlantis
I'd pay big bucks to see treasure planet or hunchback on the big screen
>Disney has been losing so much money on it's movies that they have to revert to releasing old material in a desperate attempt to capture people's nostalgia
>they didn't count on the fact that they could just watch the films on Disney+ instead of sitting in a nasty theater for 2 hours
>they didn't count on the fact that they could just watch the films on Disney+ instead of sitting in a nasty theater for 2 hours
The whole purpose of this is to see what genres the masses are willing to go out to a theater for and spend money on without being limited to Disney+ statistics.
>only two traditionally animated movies
It's over
I haven't seen beauty and the beast and hunchback of notre dame since I was a little kid and had them on VHS, so I hardly remember any of it. If they release them in any cinemas around here I'll probably take the opportunity to watch them with one of my nieces or nephews. There's no way I'd watch Moana or Frozen, though.
So is this how they're choosing their next live-action remake? Just throw some random movies in there and see which one makes the most money.
Imagine a toy story live-action
Not like that. I want the toys to be humans
?t=340
>bongfat
no
>Chris Pratt as Woody
>Chris Pine reprising his role as Buzz Lightyear
>no name minority as Bo Peep, who is no longer Woody's love interest
>Josh Gad as Rex, who is now gay
Hamm would definitely be Rex's gay partner.
If they use stop-motion might be cool.
You know I'm surprised they haven't pushed for a live action re-make of the Incredibles yet.
>Pirates of the Caribbean Live action remake
At this point I wouldn't put it past them.
They're doing this so people won't completely ignore Wish when it comes to theaters in November. Although if Wish isn't as good as Moana people are going to be disappointed.
Wish doesn't have LMM writing the music but some girl who has written a bunch of b-side songs.
Do you think Twitter's gonna have a shitfit over Asha being too light?
Why should they? She's from Spain right? They're not even dark.
Why would Disney get some newbie to write the songs of their 100th anniversary film? Are they stupid?
>Why would Disney get some newbie to write the songs of their 100th anniversary film? Are they stupid?
Jennifer Lee and Kathleen Kennedy still have jobs, so yes, they're ass-backwards.
>zero movies from when disney was alive
>zero movies from the golden age
>zero short animations
epic just epic
>No Sleeping Beauty
>No fricking Snow White!
It's shit!
Midgets don't deserve screentime, haven't you heard?
>Disney is re-releasing eight movies into theaters for the anniversary
anniversary, or clear attempt to shore up some money after their financial failures
So they are testing the market to see wich one will get a sequel?
More than half of these already have sequels/remakes in development
Is there anything original left in this company?
It's either a sequel or it sucks, no point in between
And also sequels that suck, don't forget those.
I wish they added Aladdin 1992 on there.
>Not the live action remakes
Gee I wonder why?
Really fricking stupid to use Pixar movies. They also didn't drop the orginal Littler Mermaid because it would have upstaged the slave mermaid movie.
>No Snow white
the people at Disney need to kill themselves now.
Toy Story will look like shit kek.
I'll go to Beauty and the Beast and maybe Lion King.
138003471
stfu you autistic /misc/tard
Some that I would put on my linup.
>Hercules
>The Little Mermaid.
>Pocahontas.
>Hunchback
>Beauty and the Beast.
>Snow White
What am I missing? I like the movies for the music more than anything.
Fricking snore fest really? Do you want it to flop twice?
I like the music, as I said.
5265
Just realized if they're including live action movies they could have Mary Poppins over Coco or Moana.
They're getting desperate.
Can’t wait for them to release TLM and do a deviantart style recoloring her to match her remake design.
I just heard about it. I can't figure out if I'm near any of their select theaters for this though which is annoying. How the hell do I find out? The tickets thing on Fandango that everyone's posted around doesn't do anything no matter what state I put in.
>obligatory "limited screening" events
>only one theater in my state is even doing it and it's 2 hours away
come on
138006116
moron
And they're all crap
Ok NPC
Lion King, B&B, Toy story and Pirates are all objectively good, but Coco and Moana? Who the frick remembers Coco? They have 100 years of shit to draw from and this is what they pick? Frick just re release Snow White or something.
I mean, I can't imagine why a lot of people will rush out to see these when it's cheaper to watch on Disney+. I can see a few Disney buffs going for the big screen experience, but not a ton.
Then again, with only Elemental (shit) and Ruby Gillman (shit) as competition, parents might choose to take their kids to see these by power of elimination.
>In fact they made it worse, they had the prince be a young kid who was like ten or eleven years old getting cursed for not knowing anything about love and relationships.
But that wasn't the reason...
>must pay them off a golden parachute
I mean, giving them a gold parachute before they jump sounds totally worth it.
They forgot Tangled
Why does every Mouse thread become /misc/tarded? Can you guys just get hobbies?
Our hobbies were enjoying stuff from Disney, or from franchises they bought.
That is, before they ruined it all with /misc/ bullshit.
>Translation: Please watch our movies. We're begging you, here are the movies you actually like
Its all trash minus toy story and pirates neither of which are disney movies. NO FRICKING 90's ANIMATION NO FRICKING ANIMATION WHAT SO EVER NO CLASSICS its all fricking modern trash minus frozen.
What the frick are they doing holy shit Walt must be having a meltdown when he breaks free I will pity every israelite working at Disney their deaths will not be slow and painless
This is my list, and I'm basing this off of importance to the company.
Snow White is their first.
Cinderella saved them from bankrupcy.
Mary Poppins got them to notice Disney can do live-action as well (even though it was not their first live-action production).
Toy Story is the first CG movie with Pixar collaboration.
Little Mermaid jumped off their 90's renassiance.
Lion King got them into Broadway.
I'm a moron and didn't notice Photoshop cropped my image when I exported, but whatever. Pretend Cinderella is there. I forgot to mention Tangled which kicked off their CG rejuvenation period.
I have no idea what the 8th movie would be, I had it blank. I guess Beauty and the Beast just for being nominated for best picture, but I didn't want to stack too many 90's movies.
If Warner Bros. also did this for their 100th anniversary and you had to choose eight films from their library to put back in theaters, what would you pick?
I'd go with
>Casablanca
>Singin in the Rain
>2001: A Space Odyssey
>Space Jam
>The Iron Giant
>Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
>The Dark Knight
>The Lego Movie
>Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Fricking burgers not understanding what the philosopher's stone was.
>no 1989 Batman
>Space Jam
are you for real dude?
yep, it's still by far the most popular Looney Tunes movie and the only one that people would buy tickets for
You fricking think a goddamn mid film from the goddamn 90s deserves a spot from a selection of 8 in ALL OF THE WB’S 100 YEARS OF FILM HISTORY, gtfo dummy
>Cats Don't Dance
>Quest for Camelot
>Osmosis Jones
>Smallfoot
>No Roger Rabbit
>No Fantasia
>No Jungle Book
>No Dumbo
>No Ichabod and Mr. Toad
>No Mary Poppins
It’s shit!
Why aren't they doing Princess and the Frog? It had a black/green lead, and was their final 2D film. I'd pay $20 to see that on the big screen.
homie why are your ticket prices so overpriced. I'm paying $2 in my home country to watch a movie tomorrow.
Wait, what about that last 2D Pooh movie? Wasn't it in theatres over there?
>100th anniversary
>none of the movies are the old ones
brehs...
They should do shit like this more often. Why is GKIDS the only company with the balls to do it?
Ghibli is really selective with their library and their marketing, so people who like their films are going to see them since lack of overexposure makes their films feel special. Most companies force brand growth and can't sustain re-release engagement as easily.
>the lion king
The shitty remake...
>beauty and the beast
Isn't this the shitty remake too?
Only 3 out of these 8 movies are watchable.
A. moron
B. moron
and C. they're all watchable homosexual
Watch Lion King and Beauty and the Beast so they know to make 2D films.