>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY
>AND DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY. >AND DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
It's a succinct one, though
>insult chuds for years on end
>get upset when they don't go to see your shit
Why does this surprise them exactly? It's simple cause and effect.
>FRICK YOU WHITE MEN, DON'T COME SEE OUR MOVIES, THEY AREN'T FOR YOU
>movie bombs
>WHY DIDN'T WHITE MEN COME SEE OUR MOVIE? THIS IS YOUR FAULT!
You love to see it.
Bigger problem is the gay shit. Adult men have never been the target audience for Disney, but Angry Soccer Moms are a huge target audience for them. And pushing trannies and homosexuals in your films and amusement parks is going to piss off that core audience.
Bruh, nobody cares one way or the other. They're just boring, middle-of-the-road movies. People don't want to shell out money for that.
They want their childhoods back.
Make good movies again. Fire every rainbow haired freak that can't write or direct for shit and start hiring people who actually know what the frick they're doing.
Literally this. You gave them a fair swing, honestly I'm not even mad, but they're just no good at this. It's time to send them packing.
> You gave them a fair swing, honestly I'm not even mad, but they're just no good at this.
THANK YOU
same thing I felt for obama to be honest
he got his shot, he botched it, now its time for white men to be in charge again
We should give a woman a try.
People who know what they're doing don't exist because the rainbow haired freaks are the ones "teaching" animation now. Disney literally could not turn this around if they wanted to.
True.
The old guard are
1. dead
2. dying
3. retired
4. their best years are behind them that they’ll make crap as well.
Anyone got that doomer post from someone talking about a prestigious art university and how no one even learns how to draw there anymore.
>people say good movies but they don't make money
Bitch, nobody is gonna tell you their business plans on what they find marketable, people just want good content because they're not spending their money producing it.
A GREAT movie.
I want a female character that isn't "smart", "kind" or "quirky". More importantly, one that isn't a Rapunzel/Anna reskin.
>I want a female character that isn't "smart", "kind"
What exactly do you mean by this? Are you implying you want a female lead that's dumb and unlikable?
Korra was great
Yeah, so great her show flopped TWICE.
anon, when quotes are used usually it's for a reason
big think now, why he do? may reason be?
anons behave erratically and arbitrarily like dogs, there's no reason to consider their actions to have significant thought behind them
They don't make sense in the context.
Are the words in quotes because the smart characters aren't actually smart? Because if that was your intent you worded it horribly.
>Because if that was your intent you worded it horribly.
He didn't. Everyone but you understood him.
Nah, they already tried that with Blue Eye Samurai.
NTA but yeah, give me more c**ts with a golden heart like pic related.
They had a c**t protagonist in Raya and her movie flopped too (though not because Raya was a c**t)
It'a because everyone else in that movie was a worse c**t than her except the dragon.
Her group was okay, Namaari was actually one of the worst parts of the movie and she basically dragged the whole thing down.
Honesty yes. In an effort to give their female characters depth and agency and be empowering they've overcompensated into them being insufferable. If they intentionally tried writing a making bimbos they might accidentally stumble onto something approaching the classic princesses.
Yes, actually, but there's a catch to this: the story must be aware that dumb and unlikable character is kind of dumb and unlikable. That is the entire foundation of fricking Konosuba, every girl is the worst girl and everybody loves them. Yunyun who is objectively the best girl is actively being punished for being the best girl because these people are the fricking worst and she's stuck with them, and that's hilarious.
I am tired of fricking seeing female characters who are villains to most rational fricking people being justified by and advocated for primarily by Disney. They aren't the only culprit but they are the main exporter of that shit.
Women are dumb and unlikable which is why chick flicks are so popular among women because they can relate. Women need to be bullied it makes them cute and enjoyable to be around.
Nimona maybe
I'd be okay with a Rapunzel reskin, that movie was based.
Since they're so hellbent on remakes, remake it in 2D. Make it in the show's art style, for all I care, it works. Just keep from changing anything else and you have gold there.
Disney has forgotten how to write female characters who aren't Quirk Chungus.
Babylon Bee sucks, nerd
>nerd
homosexual.
Okay, but a better question is how the FRICK did the Lion King pull such high numbers?
Name recognition. The lack of originality in Hollywood has always been at least half audiences faults for shitting on original work and lapping up retreads and sequels. Ultraviolet and Resident Evil were both kind of shitty, but one of them had an existing brand behind it and got a half dozen more movies.
Stuff that legit pushes the boundaries of special effects always brings in massive numbers. Other stuff does as well, but if you have something touted as revolutionary or truly mind blowing special effects wise, it makes bank. Avatars the obvious example people go to, but Roland Emmerich never had a bomb before Moonfall because Moonfall stopped pushing the limits of destruction effects. 2012 wasn't a good movie by any stretch but it make a frickload of money just because it promised something visually spectacular.
Lion King remake, for all its faults, did push the novelty of effects reaching close to real life so far that people kept saying the backgrounds were real and the animals were laid over them or things like the grass or water were real. People went for something they couldn't see anywhere else.
Twisters, Star Wars, hell even going back to the 50's with War of the Worlds, special effects that push the boundaries and break through them almost always hit and make money. It's one of the reasons why Marvel Movies took off in the first place, Iron Man looked revolutionary when it came out with the suit effects due to Stan Winston bringing his A game. Kind of funny they got so much worse later.
People understimate how much the average person can tell about special effects. But even normies were clowning on the action scenes of Marvels or Antman 3. GotG3 and Loki S2 somehow lucked out into looking fine, and with GotG3 it was because Gunn actually storyboards and plans his shit instead of doing 30 retakes and improvising on a limited schedule.
I'm happy someone else is saying it. It's ridiculous to think that Winston's brilliant practical effects were later replaced entirely by Pajeet CGI farms.
didn't top gun and the disney wars movies have a shit ton of practical effects?
It worked for Top Gun 2 because it didn't focus hard on fricking up literally everything else.
In Top Guns case, the practical effects were the selling point. REAL JET SHIT is how it sold itself, if it had been CGI jets no matter how impressive it wouldn't have hit as hard. Sure, when it comes to sci fi stuff like Avatar, people wanna see some crazy ass tech, but when you tout real life war stuff you better bring some real life war toys. It was an event because there's just no other movie with these kinds of insane jet scenes.
There's a Warner executive who's probably reading this and going "I KNEW IT!".
But good word of mouth probably helped. I kept hearing it was finally an uncucked action movie again.
>>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY
-Characters that avoid being less compelling than damp cardboard
-Actual narrative structure and character arcs
-Musical numbers that aren't garbage
-Humor that isn't based on awkwardness and/or snark
-Each film should have its own distinct identity, both in terms of visuals and soundtrack
There also a few things that don't really lend themselves to bullet points. First up is "charm". You could call it "charisma" or whatever you like but it's a lot like obscenity in that it's almost impossible to define but you know it when you see it. Next, a sense of wonder. Almost as hard to define, but if "charm" is something that makes you smile on the inside then wonder is something that makes you stop and take a breath to admire the view in the same capacity. Last but certainly not least, morality. I don't mean moralizing, I mean characters having moral stances that they're willing to suffer for and/or having a marked lack of morals either because they're a son of a b***h or because morals don't apply to them. If you want to do a comparison, just put HTTYD side by side with anything that Disney has made lately and go down the list.
Yeah, a well-executed spectacle is something that should never be underestimated. If you look at the top ten most profitable movies of all time (inflation-adjusted, of course) almost all of them got there because of people telling their friends and family "holy shit, you gotta go check out this new movie" because they came away from it dazzled.
>Lion King remake, for all its faults, did push the novelty of effects
And there was nothing for the movie to boast about other than those effects. I watched a video comparing the original Just Can't Wait sequence to the CGI remake, and it's amazing how much more lifeless the latter was. Animated Simba swings from vines and whatnot while CGI Simba just paces and lip syncs.
Eventually moviegoers are going to learn the same lesson as gamers and snub shows that try to rely on visual fidelity
?si=LVJGnjtXz7Hd8nbu
It's not even just the visuals, the singing in the remake is actually worse.
There weren't any gays in it so it wasn't banned by chinese censors.
I thought that pumba was played by a gay
nostalgia and brand
It speaks to the strength of the original story and father-son theme. Also, the 25-year gap between the remake and the original means it's perfectly positioned to milk the nostalgia of parents, while being a new theatrical experience for their kids.
People love the lion king. It's an evergreen brand even if you are moronic like disney is by making the remake look like that.
and a spinoff cartoon to the original movie where apparently the original villain wasn't evil, he was just corrupted!
>brand recognition
>remake so nostalgiagays and critics can feel safer going in
>CG so Ipad babies aren't filtered
It's the perfect "I need something to keep my kids quiet for a few hours" slop.
>high quality
Yeah sure let's go with that
This is a terrible movie to apply it to but I at least understand the logic.
Sometimes widely hated things get popular, and sometimes acclaimed things barely get shit. That statement is true.
Quit pretending unfunny satire articles are a gotcha.
Do another fairytale but this time without diversity. It’s extremely grim when people are pining for the likes of Tangled and Frozen as movies that could never be made today
Go bankrupt.
I just want Disney to cease to exist. The phase where I wanted them to unfrick themselves ended 10 years ago. Now I want them gone.
Something that isn't in the Disney Princess mold, doesn't subvert the male lead being helpless with the female lead being the true protagonist, doesn't look like it was made with models made for Tangled, doesn't rely on celebrity voice actors to market it and actually has an interesting story to tell.
>Disney Princess movie where the princess is actually a prince who got turned into one.
have a nice day troony
I want 2D animation back.
I don't blame you. Problem is there's a bunch of millennials & zoomer artists in charge that don't know how to draw, let alone draw good quality animation. And unless you want to see badly drawn CalArts bean faces or ugly Tumblr art, it doesn't look promising. The 90s Disney renaissance was great because there was actual talent calling the shots & animating the films. Plus you have people like Don Bluth who pushed the boundaries & took the risk Disney didn't. Another problem that later followed was unions making such animation even more expensive.
I doubt we'll ever have another Disney renaissance.
Disney just needs to outsource to South Korea and Japan like everyone else while they pay to train new, promising talent.
I fricking love the impossible geometry of the hair in this.
Something so subtle. Goddamn, I miss good animation.
Anon please if we spent that much money on animation there wouldn't be enough left for our investors
CGI costs more
You see you cant have it because then we cant do last minute adjustments as easily.
And disney has a fetish with changing the stories half way through production.
Me too, but it's worthless if the story and characters are shit
I wish howard ashman didnt die.
Animated musicals would have eventually run their course, having one giga-talented lyricist wouldn't have averted that. We'd have arguably some better Disney musicals (Aladdin might not have been one of them), and some fricking astounding stage shows when they'd inevitably sent him packing back to Broadway but it wouldn't have averted this death spiral of brand recognition sincerity rot.
Dont care, I know he had more musicals in him.
Can't disagree with that.
Jesus Christ, is it so hard to find better lyricists than that? Why the frick haven't they given the Avenue Q/Book of Moron guys a shot at a Disney movie? Bring Trey Parker along too, the man has two framed letters from Sondheim sucking his dick for a reason.
honey, check the frozen credits
They have multiple soundtracks homosexual how about you just say what you’re trying to say with a modicum fo specificity?
no. do your homework
I accept your concession
Frozen 1 and 2 were made by the Avenue Q people my friend
Now we're getting Lin-Manuel shit
>Moana
>Encanto
>Little Mermaid
>Vivo
Why do you homosexuals keep posting this shit here as if Disney struggling is somehow a problem. If the company dissolved into dust it would only be a benefit to mankind. I hate monopolies.
These are good posts
>Shitting on Disney
>Wander Over Yonder pic
Oh the irony
It's unironic. Ever since they cancelled my favorite orange spoon I want them dead.
No one hates d*sney more than those who once loved the stuff they own.
t. SW EU fan
Hell I hate them because I loved them until they started fricking everything up.
It's never your enemies who betray you.
This. I am a big fan of Donald Duck and his cartoons and comics and have enjoyed many Disney cartoons and series, but Disney's politics in recent years have pushed me away from all of them and led me to freeze the Disney company outright. I wouldn't be sorry if someone set fire to that company. They simply deserved a worse end.
The only thing that didn't collapse were the comics about Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, so I only enjoy that franchise. The rest is bullshit.
That's not ironic at all.
It's a celebration, anon.
>stop discussing cartoons on the cartoon board
?
>I want this monopoly to die so that instead of 5 motion picture companies in control of everything we’ll instead have 4
Not that anon but it's more like I don't care if some corporation loses money. It doesn't affect me at all if their monopoly is five companies or four. The well-being of the Disney Corporation is not my concern.
I think it's odd that people like in OP's image even exist. There's people who are homeless, they're out there freezing their nuts off in the bitter winter cold right now, and weirdos are crying because Disney made slightly less money than they would have liked to have made. Boo-fricking-hoo.
Bet you anything, guys like that anon above would try to say "bu-b-b-but DIsney could give them jobs!" or something, when modern Disney has about as much "heart" as the average twitter user
Our world is now run by computer science nerds who can't even tell if something is good or bad without a rotten tomatoes score to reference.
There is a method of making good cartoons, the animation industry just rejected it. Most notably with John K's blog. They are reaping what they sowed as a result.
Scores have nothing to do with quality, critics don't understand cartoons or how to make them. Furthermore the primary audience is children who don't make the reviews. You need people who care about kids in animation.
Hahahahaha how the frick is no billion real hahaha homie just stop pumping out schlock like homie do something interesting hahaha
La Miruel of whatever his name was suited for Moana, but stop putting him everywhere else.
Nothing. I am not entitled to anything from Disney, and Disney is not entitled to me wanting something from them.
Disney is free to keep doing what they're doing, but they're not free from the consequences of that decision.
Way to miss the point you fricking idiot. She's right.
>>AND DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
literally the same defense isom fans use for isom
Isom fans are literally morons.
Sup Vito how's your comic coming along
My heart medication, got me a little fricked up. It was a joke.
I want movies about white people, straight white people. Particularly straight white men. I want the straight white men to be seen as heroic and I want them to be the protagonists. I don’t not want the straight white men to be seen as subservient to anyone but older familial straight white men. I don’t want any POC being shown as their superior. I don’t want women being shown as adept in fighting or stronger than men.
Make that or I won’t go watch your movie.
And what should these white men do in this movie?
Be straight. Be men. Kiss the girl.
SHA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA MY OH MY
LOOK AT THE BOY TOO SHY
AIN'T GONNA KISS THE GIRL!
So many people complain about Ariel being colored you can't get in a word about how uncanny all the fish look. Or Scuttlebutt just being shit.
Overcome the antagonist. Save the damsel in distress.
Hunt monsters.
There can also be women in the hunting party, but only as archers or healing mages.
Also a scene where she comes out in a leather bikini and all the men tell her the monsters will tear her to shreds and she needs to at least wear chainmail, or hardwood to remain stealthy.
I would appreciate that.
Ignore the stupid intro and just read the essay.
https://lithub.com/ian-fleming-explains-how-to-write-a-thriller/
I think people want a straightforward black and white and pink story again.
Movies where the message and story make sense. Wish only has the protagonist as the hero because the writers effectively keep telling the audience she's the hero
Don't you worship a dead pedophile who married and raped a 6-year old?
>a dead pedophile who married and raped a 6-year old?
Who is this even referring to?
muhammad
>hey wanna see the new Marvel movie?
>eh it’ll be on Disney+ in a couple months I can wait
Correct. There's too many options now to watch a movie instead of running to the theatre. Disney got caught flatfooted when times are changing fast.
Unlikely, you can say the same about... well any movie and you still got massive hits like Oppenheimer.
Not really. Disney is a brand above all else, and that brand has a streaming service with its name slapped on it. With Oppenheimer you never know what service will get it, with Disney you always know Disney+ will have it. Additionally, one is an adult-oriented film and the other is a family movie. Parents aren't going to drag their kids to the movies to watch a Disney movie when they can just wait a few months. Especially if they have multiple kids.
Live service games have taught me the average person has zero sense of delayed gratification.
are you unironically comparing gachagays with "normal" people with debts, children and real life worries?
This sounds about right. Doesn't this mean that Disney's own streaming service is maybe too well known for it's own good? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
I want a movie with some meat on its bones.
Everything is a nothingburger these days because "uhh we can't risk coming across as problematic we'll hurt the 0.04%'s fee-fees on twitter"
Every villain is walking on egg shells
Every hero is a boring talkie.
I want a musical with traditional-sounding songs, no more of this Lin-Manuel-inspired radio pop song shit.
I want a main character with an actual personality that has a fricking arc and not just, "They love their family and all their humor comes from being cute and dorky!".
I want some goddamn romance and I don't want it to be the fricking irrelevant C-plot of the thing.
I want a villain who ISN'T justified and is just plain fricking greedy, power-hungry, and feels entitled.
I want a comic relief that adds heart to the movie and doesn't just exist for the sake of "le funny animal sidekick".
I want the movie to calm down and have slow moments. It's okay if someone doesn't flap their lips every twenty seconds.
I don't want dogshit PS3 cutscene graphics. Everyone complains about "Disney sameface", I don't care about that. I don't mind that Disney has a style and that some of their characters look the same. Fricking Ghibli protagonists all look the same, too.
And lastly, I don't want a bloated cast of 20 characters who contribute nothing to the fricking movie.
>Fricking Ghibli protagonists all look the same, too.
Not at all though. Chihiro looks nothing like mononoke, Sophie, kiki ect. Though they are similar plots in some ways or similar casts in different plots.
Otherwise I agree with much of what you said.
But people usually complain about Disney SAMEFACE, and I interpreted that as quite literally, the same faces and skulls plastered on different bodies. I feel like it's the same case with Ghibli with just a few notable exceptions. Like, if I just took out Kiki and Chihiro's faces and skulls with no hair, they would be nearly identical.
None of those characters look alike, nice samegayging though
>Two anons share the same opinion?
>No... It must be ONE GUY!!!!
sameface is forgivable when it's hand drawn cuz only a handful of people are trained to animate in a particular studio's house style and will stay with the company for very well their entire life.
Disney 3D sameface is just for cheap doll production. If anything it hurts Disney when it comes to something like Wish since people will automatically compare it to vastly better animated films like Tangled or even Frozen and recognize the unfinished, sloppy animation.
But with 2D, we've seen Disney use different faces which is further amplified when they made the CG models for WiR2-- so it is possible for a big, mainstream studio. Again, I don't mind sameface no matter the medium. People always give Disney grief for it, but I'm fine with a studio having a style. Is it nice that maybe Lilo & Stitch is watercolor with a Sanders style, Hercules has a more stylized Greek mural inspired look to it, and Beauty & the Beast takes inspiration from Renassaicnce paintings? Yeah, it's very nice. But now we're in an era where Disney has a LOT of competition compared to the 90's and I'm fine with them sticking with a visual style while other studios, like Dreamworks or Sony, try to experiment more.
I mean, if Disney is going to waste all their dev resources for the final product to look like Wish, I would MUCH rather they focus on acing that same engine they used for Zootopia and Big Hero 6.
>Merida, Aurora and Cinderella
eugh
It's funny that Merida didn't even get worse.
God Cindy, Belle and Snow White's CGI forms trigger a visceral disgust, they just look wrong.
Why do Rapunzel, Elsa, and Anna look like they're auditioning for the Disney remake of the Russian Sleep Experiment? Fricking ghoulish.
How did they frick up Raps face so much when she should've been the easiest one to accurately recreate for a more stylised look?
Belle is freaking me out with those huge eyes. Tiana looks babyish. Moana’s face shrunk. Snow White just doesn’t look like her 2D counterpart. I believe converting 2D characters to 3D was a mistake.
Instead of producing these ridiculously expensive live action remakes, they could’ve reused the WIR2 princess models and assets from their other movies to produce cost effective 3D animated remakes to their classic films.
I would unironically enjoy seeing some of the older Pixar movies "remastered" like what video games do.
Didn't they do something like that for TS1 and TS2 when the third movie was on the way to theaters? I swear I remember something about the movies getting some kind of polishing
you mean like high-definition Blu-ray releases?
They did censor some parts, I think, like the casting couch joke in the end credits
Didn't Thor do that with that floating black kids head or some shit?
I want to frick 2D and 3D Pocahontas.
Why did almost all the classic Disney princesses fricking huge eyes? They look hideous.
Would 3D Mulan and Pocahontas
it's like humans share the same basic features with minor variance. holy shit
Studio Ghibli makes a new movie roughly every two or three years on average. You see it, you enjoy it, you wait a few years, and the next one still feel fresh because of it.
Disney makes multiple movies every year and they all have a homogenized executive-mandated look and feel, meaning there's no point watching multiple movies when you can just pick the one you like the most in any given year and ignore the others, knowing they'll basically be the same shit.
Anon, are you actually just fricking blind?
While you're not wrong that some of Miyazaki's girls do look alike, the characters are all still vastly different film to film. While many of his girls have strong wills at their cores, they all still widely differ in terms of how they react and handle situations. Nausicaa is very proactive, throwing herself headlong into situations where she's just barely managing to get by with her wits and skills. While someone like Fio is willing to stand up to bullying behavior, but admits she was close to crapping her pants because she acted out of gusto rather than thinking things through when she challenged the pirates
They're all Asian of course they look alike why are you mad about Accurate characters
>Not at all though.
you're blind
You just described puss in boots.
Except for the animal sidekick part but i guess it doesn’t count if the main characters are all talking animals
I'd say Perrito still checks the boxes outlined there, he was definitely the comic relief animal sidekick, but he existed literally to serves as the heart of the group.
Watch Ladybug movie.
It's tangled but in paris.
People conflating 'justification' with 'sympathetic' has been a disaster for storytelling.
A 'justified' character is one who is consistent and believable. One that didn't just wake up and decide to be evil the day before the plot begins. Greed is a justification.
Both are gay morons fighting over a patch of desert.
Yeah, but only one of those morons is getting literally free money from taxpayers in the West to carry out their decades-long genocide even though nazis are le bad or something.
stop using ESG scores for movies.
>If you don't like Disney you are a right wing Chud
Remember when the left was the party of anti-consumerism?
Bankruptcy
I want the thief back.
>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY
I want them to die.
I hope they make their gay movies until bankruptcy.
all princess movies are toy commercials, why are they even mad at poor reviews when these things real value is how much merch it can sell, and it's their latest movie and during almost christmas season, of course they will sell a load of merch just because the disney brand
>all princess movies are toy commercials, why are they even mad at poor reviews when these things real value is how much merch it can sell, and
It isn't selling.
We want Disney to order gamers to rise up and overthrow the government.
How about stop appealing only to women and little girls?
seriously they bought they bought two male focused franchises and the first thing they do with them is turn them into more female centered products.
frick them for this.
The issue is that Disney does not want to push boundaries anymore, they want another frozen
And Frozen is a terrible example to follow because unlike Snow White, Lion King and Beauty and The Beast, there was nothing boundary breaking in it's nature, the production was cheap (And unfinished, just look at the rendering), it had TWO good songs, no interesting visuals and nothing that makes you say "wow! They went above and beyond to animate this part"
What Frozen and it's terrible forgotten sequel did well was making money, Disney should be be using this money to build MONUMENTS of effort and artistry and yet they are not even allowed to make a CGI Barbie movie with a cheap rendering trick thar looks decent, they can't even be allowed to make one (uno) characters be 2D animated because "Boohoo! Rotoscoping hard!"
Good Movies with different art/design styles. Literally ALL CGI Disney movie have the same Rapunzel/Frozen and since Disney is shurring out AT LEAST 1 Movie per yer, they all blend into one sloppy mess. Back in the old days ®, most Disney movie had there own distinctive art style and design direction (with some exceptions like Robin Hood/Jungle Book), which helped to make them stick in your brain, for the better and the worse.
But as said, all DIsney wants nowadays is another Frozen so they can reap in the mad cash and the most lazy approach is to make each movie look like Frozen (in character design).
Force, on-the-nose diversity certainly doesnt help either, but is the lesser issue here, at least for me.
>Robin Hood/Jungle Book
It's funny that everybody used to give Disney a rightful earful over their blatant reuse of assets when Robin Hood came out. Now, everyone seems to either ignore the reuse of character models or animation sequences simply because they're "masked" better and not as obviously copy/pasted like JB and RH
>>Now, everyone seems to either ignore the reuse of character models or animation sequences simply because they're "masked" better and not as obviously copy/pasted like JB and RH
Which baffels me considering how awefull sameface-y the large majority of post-frozen characters are. Its literally "Elza/Anna but BROWN", "Elsa/Anny but FAT", "Elza/Anna but MALE", "Elza/Anna but ASIAN", "Elsa/Anna but literally just Elsa/Anna AGAIN"
Meanwhile, Pixar is just either falling back on sequels/spinoffs to their successful works, milking them dry of their originality. Or, they just basically make a movie that was probably in Disney's lineup of planned films, and just make it not as obviously "Disney" because "hey, Pixar doesn't look quite the same as Disney" as far as a lot of people are concerned.
>Meanwhile, Pixar is just either falling back on sequels/spinoffs to their successful works, milking them dry of their originality
how much of that is because Disney keeps demanding they make sequels?
Who cares? If Disney is forcing sequels on them it's only because none of their original works in recent years have performed worth a frick. Onward, Soul, Luca, Turning Red, that's four original films that flopped back to back.
>What do people want from Disney?
Think of everything that is described as "problematic" now that wasn't seen as such in the 90s. That's it.
>I have a Law degree so I know quite a fair bit about politics.
that's interesting, so by that logic, a significant number of people dislike things that are "woke" to the point where revenue is impacted.
And this is Disney, not a fricking beer brand.
People went to see Spider-verse so the idea that "woke" is what made Wish bomb doesn't hold much water.
IIRC this isn't the first time an intended Disney Princess' movie flopped. Meg and Esmeralda were very briefly part of the line when it was new. Given that the director had to fight to get this movie made, I think Wish was another Treasure Planet and Disney intentionally let it flop. The question is why would they do that when they've had a very bad year.
>People went to see Spider-verse so the idea that "woke" is what made Wish bomb doesn't hold much water.
It was mooching off the Spider-Man brand, so...
I wonder how "Wonka" is gonna fair. Looks pretty woke
>tons of blacks in an early European town
>behind a brilliant eccentric genius is a black girl
Powerful.
Wonka as in Chocolate Factory?
Who the frick wants more Wonka stuff after what Burton tried in the...2000s?
The Gene Wilder movie's enough
>tons of blacks in an early European town
I don't know that time period the story takes place in exactly but I'm pretty sure it won't be before the late Victorian era at best and there were definitely black people in England at that time.
It's weird how they never show up in old photographs of that era. The technology was new and everyone was taking pictures of streets or buildings so we have thousands of them to look at, but always lacking that modern "vibrant and diverse" population that supposedly always existed.
I googled 'black people in Victorian England' and got photos, artwork and articles. I know you're not stupid enough to suggest black people disappeared back to Africa after 1834 and decide to just come back in the 1960s. You could've at least stuck with the argument that it would be unrealistic for many black people to be wealthy and in positions of power at the time.
Good attempt at moving the goalpost, but his argument was that typical crowd photographs from the era did not feature blacks. Googling specifically photos of blacks would obviously produce photos of blacks, but by your reasoning any photo of a crowd from that era should contain a significant number of Blacks.
I said there were black people in Victorian England, I never said there were a lot.
Why would the rich people that owned cameras take photos of something they regretted? Black people in London have always been a problem since its ports bring foreigners from all over.
!When there were to many people of color in London this is what Queen Elizabeth I said:
“there are of late divers blackmoores brought into this realme, of which kinde of people there are allready here to manie,”
She commissioned the merchant Casper van Senden to send them to Spain and Portugal.
Ah yes, "history doesn't agree with me because institutional racism," classic gambit.
They existed, but were less than 1% of the population. Most of them were temporary workers from the colonies, only there for a few months to work in factories before going back home. You are being tremendously obtuse and you know it. There are more white people in Nairobi today than there were black people in London in 1880.
If you want an honest answer they were like 1% of the population in Britan and mostly served as lower class dockworkers or were the children of educated colonial subjects who mostly stayed in their countries of origin or when they did travel abroad stayed in high society social groups.
The actual reason why this happens is that the Black American ethnic group was so totally divorced from their tribal roots that to this day the majority look at Africa the same way most white people do, as a shithole.
Because of this they grasp to place themselves within history and culture in a way the doesn't seem denigrating to them, even if it mean reaching for the barest threads to pull upon.
You know, I'm getting sick of revisionist homosexuals like you saying "tHeRe wErE bLaCk pEoPlE" as an excuse to make every European space have demographics indistinguishable from Minneapolis.
Yea Jamaicans and they were all not liked by the majority.
depends on how well they sell old Bill as a "tumblr sexyman." He needs to be just tortured enough to elicit the "I can fix him" reaction. Ideally have a romance with the brainy negress and then she betrays him or gets killed so tumblrina can swoop in to heal his broken heart.
Huh. Didn't even hear about a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory remake. Wait. Just checked, it's a prequel?
prequel
next thing you'll tell me is that dnd was woke
Pfff of COURSE they had to do that
Didn't Willy Wonka go to Africa to kidnap the Oompa-loompa for slave labor in the original book?
They were Pygmies he paid in chocolate.
Also Dahl and his wife claimed Charlie was meant to be a little poor black kid but his editors told him nobody can relate to blacks.
Oompa Loompas where originally black but later additions he changed them to what we know now.
Naw, Willy is a hot white twink
If there's not a chocolate pun about her I will be sorely disappointed
anon roald's shit is meant to be in strange parts of the world, not realistic. or are you telling me oompaland is real
that movie is DoA simply because it ovetestimates how much people care about wonka and the trailers lack any of thr edge that made him popular.
they try WAY too hard to be whimsical and charming, you could remove black people and it wouldn't change
How is it woke?
>lead is a white man
>black character is just a sidekick
>one of the villains is black
>literally focused on Wonka alone
>behind the minds of Paddington 2
for some people the mere existance of a black person is enough to be irredeemably pozzed
You said black twice. That's enough to brush it off.
You can troll, gaslight, or genuinely not process what others are telling you. You can "win" an anonymous online argument but this isn't going to convince people to go vote X party or pay to watch Y movie.
wonka is gonna be dogshit but it's not gonna be Black folk that do it in
I agree with that.
Keep /lgbt/ in /lgbt/.
are you okay anon? I just said wonka isn't a "woke" film.
a tumblr pandering film? sure. but that's a different audience. that's like calling fujos "woke".
>behind the minds of Paddington 2
That's the only real draw, but guessing that'll be secondary. I could expect the habitual CURRENT YEAR bait-and-switch about Wonka being "literally focused on alone".
You can make this argument for the last of us 2 where giga chad Stacy beats up Ellie for being LGBTQ+ lol
Pretty sure the complains about TLOU2 was that some chick looked like a roided out monkey in the fricking apocalypse when people just barely have enough food to get through a week
Yea it was mostly Joel criticism the most and the sympathetic view on the giga Stacy but she killed Joel and that’s a good thing because Joel was selfish and allowed Ellie to live.
I just loved how people tried to say Joel was completely evil when the original game was clearly going for a grey morality and how such a decline in human society is going to make things questionable like cutting up a child who may or may not be able to help bring about a cure. Of course, the entire situation with TLOU2 was just hilarious with Sony shitting their pants over people having debates about the writing, or the fringe morons who had to drag in Ghost of Tsushima and claim it enjoying success was because "muh racism' just because the devs weren't Asian
>People went to see Spider-verse so the idea that "woke" is what made Wish bomb doesn't hold much water.
Spider-man remains the world's most popular hero and brought back the other actors to have nostalgia appeal. I'd say look to other 'woke' superhero movies to get a better reading on its' effects (no, I don't know which superheroes are woke and released this year, I've really tuned out after Endgame).
Frick, nvm me, I'm moronic and thought you meant the live-action multi-verse spider-man movie, not the animated multiverse miles one.
>made, I think Wish was another Treasure Planet and Disney intentionally let it flop.
Not even remotely, the shilled it hard.
It even shares its name with a cruise.
People hate woke content not because they're right-wing, but because of the inherent patheticness of a person that's so self-conscious about social interaction and the outside world, they devolve to being judgmental moralists. Insecurity is unattractive everywhere, and the modern Western Left suffers from that same form of insecurity that puts off people who just want to get by with their daily lives without having to decipher a neurotic person's mutterings and explanations for everything.
Yeah but is there anything woke about Wish other than Asha is brown? Magnifico isn't white either, at least I'm pretty sure he's not. If you're referring to how Disney and Disney fans keep going "THIS IS DISNEY'S FIRST _____ PROTAGONIST, LOOK AT THEM" I think that's just an overreaction to Disney's lack of diversity in their princess lineup in the 00s. They should probably cut back on doing that and just go "hey here's a movie about a character in Africa/Vietnam/Brazil" etc.
>is there anything woke about Wish other than Asha is brown?
The movie is pretty damn anti-male with how it treats Magnifico.
I mean, he literally does nothing wrong. We're just supposed to automatically assume he's evil because he's a man in power and uh, he's kind of vain I guess?
It really speaks to the mindset of the creatives and higher ups at Disney that they thought this was fine. They even made a point to advertise that Magnifico would be a "classic" Disney villain, not a twist villain. You were meant to think he was evil from the start. It's insane.
>mean, he literally does nothing wrong
See I don't trust you when you say this.
I'd tell you to watch the movie and decide for yourself, but I won't wish that evil on you.
i'm 100% sure he was another twist villain changed at the last second.
but how is he not shady at the very least? it's obvious he's a power tripping maniac, there is no reason why he wouldn't give back non harmful wishes. he only keeps them and grants a few of them (that also help him) because he wants to control people rather than because he is nice.
you can argue he's doing good things despite it all, but he's also making sure people are 100% dependent on him
Well my assumption is that wishes can be fulfilled through various magical means. Falling stars, fairy godmothers, etc. By having his citizens give them up, Magnifico prevents that from happening. Thus potentially chaotic and harmful wishes will never be granted, which helps to satisfy his paranoia.
yes, him preventing them from happening is the problem. you can make an argument for evil wishes, but i'd still be on the fence if one guy is the sole authority on what "bad wishes" are.
also, how are people not protesting? sure, they forget THEIR wish but they would notice only 1 in a 100 gets anything and start asking question. or see if they can at least get their memories back.
It's a society that gives up some personal freedom in exchange for security. The surprising thing here is that it wasn't reversed, an evil guy shows up and grants literally everything causing chaos and possibly doing shady things to make it happen all while people are content because they get their wishes only for the heroine to realize selfishness and focusing on personal desires without considering how they impact others is a problem.
>realize selfishness and focusing on personal desires without considering how they impact others is a problem
You do realize this movie was a woman's project, yeah?
Yea and there was a shit ton of rapes and crime.
Asha's friend group is ridiculously diverse despite being set in Spain. You can say, "Oh, but it's a FANTASY location!" all you want, but then why even put any emphasis on Spain at all if you're going to just make another California?
What reason does Asha's Asian friend have to be a crippled if it's NOT going to a plot point that she wished to not be crippled and Magnifico never granted it? Oh, because that would be "insulting" to the disabled community even though it would totally work for the story-- and it's little things like THAT where the subtle "woke" influence is felt.
>Asha's friend group is ridiculously diverse despite being set in Spain. You can say, "Oh, but it's a FANTASY location!" all you want, but then why even put any emphasis on Spain at all if you're going to just make another California?
Tbh even as someone who doesn't mind diversity and thinks history had more of it than what we're taught, I partially agree with you. Disney was trying to reap those real-life diversity points, even though it being set in specific period of Spanish history means practically nothing to modern audiences. It really should've been set in a made up fantasy kingdom like Corona.
>What reason does Asha's Asian friend have to be a crippled
Well, disabled people exist. They don't need to justify their existence or need a plot that completely revolves around their disability when they do show up in stories. We obviously really disagree on this whole diversity thing, I can see. I think it's good/fine that Disney has more diverse characters, and I think Asha's friend being disabled is the least of the movie's problems.
The real problem is they cut out the parts that were a movie for optics. The love story got cut, the other half of the villain duo got cut really poorly, so you just have Asha as this kind of entitled wannabe who never learns a lesson or grows or changes and just gets what she wants, and Magnifico's defeat comes off as hollow and lazy because we never really explore the nature of his tyranny.
>The love story got cut
I thought that was meant to be a younger version of her grandfather, not her love interest.
>Well, disabled people exist
But the point is for this specific story, there is a very obvious story beat where someone wishes to magically get better with that wish never being granted while the King bullshits and goes, "Uuhhh, it's dangerous", pulling back the curtain for Asha in questioning, "How the hell is that dangerous?".
If this was just a random slice-of-life story about a girl and her friend who happens to need a cane, it would be nothing. But it's like the story was tailor-made to put a quick spotlight on that and it never came. It would be like if the crippled kid in Shazam never ONCE brought up how he wishes he could just say a word and suddenly throw away his crutches, even for an hour.
Typically (not always) in fantasy settings, you want to show off the fantasy world's solution to disabilities just to add some worldbuilding. The wheelchair kid in Psychonauts 2 uses his thought bubble instead of wheels, blind Geordi in Star Trek has a unique visor, Avatar's Toph uses her senses of the Earth. It's almost bizarre that Asha has a disabled friend in a kingdom ruled by a MAGIC-WIELDING King to the point where you can see the diversity checklist. Being able to "see the strings" is often why people complain.
>Well, disabled people exist. They don't need to justify their existence
Irl they don't. In entertainment media every single thing needs to justify its existence. Nobody likes to look at cripples unless one has a fetish for cripples.
>or need a plot that completely revolves around their disability when they do show up in stories.
There is zero (0) reasons to show cripples unless it is plot-related.
In Katawa Shoujo plot is rotated around cripples. In 90s Spider-Man Alistair Smythe is a plot device for negotiations between his father and Kingpin.
Everything has to be plot-related, things, that most people don't like on its own, MUST be plot-related. Otherwise it is just someone's disgusting fetish.
don't they specifically say people from all over the world go live there in hopes of getting their wishes granted?
Yeah, but again, there's zero purpose in even taking a real-world location as influence and saying, "This is Disney's first Spaniard princess!". They took all the visual inspiration from the architecture, but removed most of the culture and people. Rosas could be located anywhere on the globe and you could easily tweak the names if you wanted and it would still be 100% the same. It's not like Agrabah (Aladdin) or Kumandra (Raya) which you can actually imagine as a fictional location near its real-world counterpart.
The only purpose of Rosas being a Spain-inspired kingdom is so they can say Asha is a Spaniard princess and now they can check that off their list for their toy line-up.
oh, i agree it's not well thought out, i just dont see it as a major flaw because it still makes sense in the context of the movie
An Spaniard princess that Spaniards cannot relate to because she looks like a Subsaharian-African.
To be fair she looks more like a modern day African American teenager than either an arab, spaniard or black person from that age
Most Disney princesses look modern, especially for the time periods they're in. The fact that you can simply edit Rapunzel into some regular clothes and she looks like a modern pre-teen says a lot. Only Snow White and Aurora look like they properly represent the time period they're in.
What? Snow and Aurora are notorious for how inaccurate their designs are. Snow has flapper hair.
She's a moor. She's more spanish than any white person ever could be.
Genuinely not sure if you're trolling or moronic, so I guess good job, or frick you moron, whichever one applies.
>Spain gets the worst Disney Princess movie and Pokemon game in years
They just can't catch a break
>Wish is the first Disney film portraying a Spaniard lead character
>The Sign of Zorro release in 1960
Like I know these articles are being written by chatbots and/or literal morons, but why make such an outlandish claim in the first place if you're not willing to spend 10 seconds googling it?
The same people who think entire racial groups really give a shit about having a "first whatever" in fricking movies. Most people really don't fricking care about race, but because the current social "trend" is to try and resegregate people and pit them against one another, you get this shit where "people" think that the Spanish are somehow desperate for "representation" in media, as if the only validation in all of existence is if you can see a character that looks like you
BUT THE MOORS ARE LITERALLY NOT A SPANISH PEOPLES. They are the decendants of the invading force that raped the native spanish peoples for hundreds of years. This is to the point that "There are no moors watching" is a common expression to this day when you are giving the all clear for something.
Not even sure if I'm following you, but according to DNA tests, Spaniards have mainly Celtic ascendency. Besides, Asha doesn't look like a Moor, she looks looks like a black girl.
what videos is she watching where she sees those comments cuz they sure as hell ain't official Disney vids since kids content has comments turned off automatically. Sounds like she's making shit up.
She's not going to admit she watches pirated content and clips where the comments are not turned off.
Try actually going on youtube sometime: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHt7Otgx9-Y
Disney sucks and I don't want to watch their movies any more. Their only chance of gaining me back as a viewer is to go back to 2D animation.
You know a good strategy for making a good movie?
Don't make a movie until you have a good idea a major reason for Disney having flop after flop is because they feel that they have to shit out a movie every other month instead of focusing on making good movies, of course Disney will never change their tactic of creating slop on an assembly line because like nearly all corporations these days they don't care about quality or public response they need eternal growth all that matters is that the line goes up.
>Lion King made money
From the chinese, all of these movies all only make money because of china and China hates blacks and gays if you have those China won't go see it and it will fail.
Focus on telling a good story. That's it. That's what people want.
What they don't want is to go to the theater and be lectured about why they're terrible, or to see a writer or director or producer making a $150 million therapy session where they air all of their grievances or neuroses in front of the world.
They're no longer interested in telling timeless stories. Now everything has to be Relevant, and has to Reflect The World We Live In Today. This is what happens when you let people who have literally no personality beyond activism in the door.
Not everything is as woke as people claim. It's called wokespotting.
Wokespotting is laser-focused, bad-faith interpretation. It's the art of combing through a work to find individual details which can be contorted into support for your own foregone conclusion. At its most basic, it's really just a game of recognising objects: man, woman, family, government, dress, gun and the positioning of those objects: woman defeats man, family dominates man, woman rejects dress, government dominates man in a way that can be read, however flimsily, as pushing that nebulous woke agenda. Importantly, how the story frames these objects and positions is largely unimportant if it happens to line up with the anti-woke narrative, great, but if not, it doesn't matter all the wokespotting game requires is that those positioned objects be there in some capacity. The already established anti-woke mythology does the rest, does the heavy lifting, substitutes in for framing.
lol, where'd you copy-paste this newspeak memorandum from?
Imagine if Chicken Run came out today. They would be calling it a trash feminist movie that goes against killing animals when in reality its just harmless.
Shame on you, picking on a straw man
with bean mouth
That's all true though. Hollywood was always full of the same propaganda, it just wasn't as overt and obnoxious as today
okay so what's the real reason why people don't like movies now?
The internet.
Not to mention, weren't those so called "woke" movies called "problematic" and "cannot be done by today's standards"?
Since when is the past both "woke" and regressive" at the same time?
need receipts anon coz I've seen progressive people still consider T2 progressive while loathing Mulan live action
>What if Terminator 2 came out today
Damn... the whole meme is so disingenuous
Black person, Sarah was stated to be training every day for years in preparation for the rise of Skynet. And she did everything for her child, not for herself. Men aren't shown to be evil because the protagonist (Arnold) and the messiah (John Connor) are both men. This pic is stupid.
You could have just said "let's compare it to the latest Terminator".
Psst. Hey! Terminator 2 sucks.
Wasn’t this era also super steroided up and gay?
Way to overgeneralize actual criticisms towards woke nonsense
>woke shit has always existed in movies, so stop complaining
All you're proving is that people pay more attention nowadays.
Can you provide an example of wokespotting?
>does the right-wing political aisle just hate Disney now
But the left is winning the culture war and so many more people are on the left. Surely you don't need those poor right-wing people to go see movies to make them successful. The left can carry the media industry on their own due to their superior numbers.
tbph this is becoming a problem for leftists, as their ability to maintain the illusion that they're at least 50% of the population and not 0.0001% of the population becomes increasingly more sloppy as time goes on
It's gotten to the point where they're just turning off comments and downvotes on their own sites, and getting dragged everywhere else
>turning off comments
"Comments have been disabled for this video" is a sure sign that fricking youtube commentators, of all people, were destroying a video's message.
...well that or it;s a literal kids' video
I've got that windows news ticker on my work laptop, and they recently removed dislikes and always turn off comments on any article presenting troons as victims, so you can only see the number of upboats and not say anything about it
oh gee, I remember videos being ratio'd
Though it's always seems fair to presume that any video with many views and few likes would be ratio'd to hell if disliked were present.
Disney has been a global icon for a century.
don't worry. they won't have kids and will all die young and no one will miss them. then we will have the comment section back.
Disney should study Puss in Boots: The Last Wish and draw inspiration from that. Study what? Literally everything about it. Fricking Dreamworks made a better Disney movie than Disney.
Dreamworks is made up of former Disney animators.
Back in the 90s maybe, but now it's probably original animators
>Fricking Dreamworks made a better Disney movie than Disney.
I honestly don't get why people act like this is surprising. Back when Disney was still making decent films they definitely had more good films releasing than Dreamworks did just due to sheer volume, but if you look back at their overall filmography Dreamworks has had WAY more consistent output of generally good films vs bad since they started than Disney has had in that same time period. Sure they've put out the occasional garbage like Shark Tale and they're way more prone to pumping out tons of sequels to something that's a big success, but most of their original offerings have been pretty great.
>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY
A good movie.
Tbh a huge factor in Wish flopping is that Disney and other streaming services got viewers too comfortable with the idea of waiting a month for movies to go on streaming where they can ~$15, watch it from the comfort of their couch and not have to worry about buying overpriced snacks. I'm not saying Wish is some hidden gem, but it'd *probably* be doing a bit better if Disney actually advertised it and if there wasn't a guarantee it'll be on D+ before winter ends. It's not bombing because Asha is brown or because her friends are ugly and there's no romance. Disney has the numbers to know non-white protags with no romance stories can sell well. Again, not saying Wish is actually great, because I've read some reviews and reactions from non-chuds and it just sounds like it's a very corporate movie. There's nothing really special about it. Asha is apparently really dull, the song lyrics are bad, and they accidentally wrote Magnifico in a way that people unironically think he was right while botching his descent into full-blown villainy. Also the internet makes it really easy for misinformation to spread, so Disney has to put up with adults who just hate their movies and lack media literacy spreading the dumbest shit, like how Asha is Cinderella's Fairy Godmother or the talking goat will find Zootopia.
Mario made money despite that same fact also being true for said movie.
You can't compare Mario who has been a global icon for decades with a newcomer like Asha. Like I said even if Disney had advertised Wish it wouldn't be the new Frozen but it also wouldn't be one of their biggest flops in the last decade.
>You can't compare Mario who has been a global icon for decades with a newcomer like Asha.
You certainly can when Asha was supposed to be the latest Disney Princess. Wish wasn't a new IP per se, it's part of a brand that's maybe not Mario huge but still big.
We'll have to see how the merch sells. I doubt it's gonna be Frozen levels, though, with how boring Asha looks.
Those Black person braids ain't exactly an aesthetic look.
disney has it's own proprietary streaming platform and they've never failed to put any of their movies in it a few months after the cinemas, unlike illumination with mario.
also don't forget a big hashtag while promoting mario was "only in cinemas"
>like how Asha is Cinderella's Fairy Godmother
but that's literally what the movie implies at the end. if she wasn't intended to literally be Cinderella's fairy godmother, they fricked that up in the writing department since most people seem to infer that given the implication that Magnifico becomes the magic mirror in Snow White. If it wasn't meant to be perceived that way, they fricked up since it seems a good enough portion of the audience is taking that away from their theater experience.
i thought it was just a very on the nose reference like every other reference in the ending sequence
>Also the internet makes it really easy for misinformation to spread, so Disney has to put up with adults who just hate their movies and lack media literacy spreading the dumbest shit, like how Asha is Cinderella's Fairy Godmother or the talking goat will find Zootopia.
Anon... this movie was sold as a prequel to the rest of the Disney canon.
I want them to stop chasing the lightning in a bottle that was Pirates and shift any further adaptations of theme park rides to animation instead.
Well we almost had a Haunted Mansion cartoon series before they decided a second live-action movie was worth the risk. Lmao.
Any potential hype for the second live-action movie was dead the second they announced Guillermo del Toro's version was shitcanned. They should have just let the Muppet version have a bigger budget and runtime.
They should make a few mid-budget Muppet movies tbh. Like stop making movies with $100+ million budgets and just focus on rebuilding your image. Also cancel Toy Story 5.
Fricking this, why does every movie have to cost so much? Sounds like a tax scam.
That's exactly what it is, anon. It's why so many old properties get buried and never seen again. They do these terrible movies and shows as a tax write-off because the amount of money they keep from claiming it as a loss on their tax filings greatly exceeds the 'loss' they took on the show or movie flopping. While I wouldn't have a problem with that necessarily, when they do that specific trick, they have to file with the court systems that they won't continue/redo the series because the IRS would view it as double-dipping.
The Muppet Haunted Mansion movie was surprisingly decent. It’s still weird Rizzo being memory-holed.
>Heaps of people are saying they want 'good' movies. However movies with good reviews and/or audience scores are not delivering the big box office numbers
Gee Skye, I don't know. You think maybe there could be something off about these good reviews and/or audience scores?
That and maybe perhaps a lot of valid criticism has gotten overshadowed by a bunch of racist, b***hless redditors?
Like how are we even gonna make it?
Disney has been running on goodwill/nostalgia fumes for years and only now are people starting to finally catch on to their low effort shit and stop showing up.
to stay the frick away from kids - that wasn't a joke, that's what people want - so obviously we have a major situation here
Let's make this a reaction image
>nobody:
>people with grey eyes: :
>if you only knew how bad things really are
>WHAT makes a good movie? What types of movies do you want to see? What would put your ass in a seat?
Maybe they should have asked all those people who managed to do it in the Disney Renaissance.
My two minutes effort.
The twittergay is dumb but I do think saying "make good movies" is a pretty simplistic answer. WHAT makes a good movie? What types of movies do you want to see? What would put your ass in a seat? For me it's a 2D animated film with strong music, interesting art direction, and honestly a proper retelling of a classic fairy tale. .
>the current year
>she still can't understand marketing and the toxic self sucking cycle of the critic review world
>AND DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
That's kinda the answer but not because "good" movies make money as much as now with the recent recession/depression/whatever the frick you want to call the current state of the economy the general audience has become forced to more prudent in their entertainment. Back then garbage like the Lion King remake or Frozen 2 could survive by sheer name recognition and families just shrugging and going "Eh, my kids will like it and I have fond memories of it".
But as families across the world are now budgeting and being mindful of what they spend that shrug off "Oh, I know this thing" is no longer enough. People have become more mindful and want to make extra sure what they watch is worth the price.
What constitutes as a good movie is now being defined by "professional critics". Senseless inclusion, blackwashing, forced diversity and lgbt themes literally guarantee a minimum of an above average score for films.
Very rarely will we get a remarkable film that is a faithful vision of the creator. Nowadays, the film must go through a strict vetting process by a committee to make sure the manufactured goyslop is safe and marketable.
The only film I have been excited for is Nosferatu by Robert Eggers. I don't know how he gets away with faithful casting, but he does. He won't get away with it forever, so enjoy it while you can.
Why do I get the feeling that you don't think Killers of the Flower Moon or Oppenheimer count?
well we are talking about comics and cartoons here no?
Neither is the new Nosferatu film.
>Senseless inclusion, blackwashing, forced diversity and lgbt themes literally guarantee a minimum of an above average score for films.
You say this like the movie of this discussion wasn't critically panned.
>Left
Reviewer count barely hits the triple digits
>Right
Reviewer count hovers between 300 and 500
>that difference in review count
Seems that old movies have simply been drowned out, because more people write reviews of more recent stuff.
Who wants to tell Cartoonshi that Disney cannot lose money because they are owned by BlackRock?
I thought Blackrock had problems of their own, now
>AND DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
Yes, it literally is, you sociopath imbecile
I mean, they kinda have a point. Shit movies used to make billions and shit movies still top the charts but now it's no longer shit made by Disney.
Even disregarding quality Disney goes through cycles of being popular and unpopular. Even if they somehow cracked the secret to only ever making good movies people would get tired of the Disney style and drift away, then come back at a later date.
I don't think Disney ever had this bad of a reception. Even during their dark ages, they didn't stagnate this hard creatively.
I think the issue lies with the slow removal of every talented creative from any position of power in the greater Disney company. Outside of the teams actually making the movies the leadership seems so corporate and dull. And now that they're formula is drying up on both WDAS and Marvel, the company just seems completely aimless at how to even function anymore.
Constant rewrites, executive overreach, lack of creativity, cannibalizing their own profits through streaming. I think the company is going to hit a point where it calls for major changes in leadership.
Home on the Range up to Bolt was a very boring era of weak plots set in white America, so I feel that that's a much more stagnant era. Can't forget the time they just meandered about for a couple of years because Walt Disney died either.
What I feel is happening is that the competition has never been this brutal before, between Spiderverse raking in the spectacle points, Mario/Minions vacuuming up the mainstream crowd, and Dreamworks delivering the occassional sucker punch of A Better Disney Movie than Disney.
The disney dark age is a bit disingenuous. Their dark age was just Disney not putting out good animated movies while the company shifted over to other projects and endevors that still ended up making them profit.
Meanwhile current Disney is failing at literally everything.
Shame "Disney's fall of Rome" doesn't roll off the tongue like "Disney dark age", and the fact that it sounds like a cringey youtube documentary that's sixteen parts, each five hours long
Their 'dark ages' were never that bad to begin with, they're mostly rated lowly because critics were b***hing about how they weren't "magical princesses talking to funny animal sidekicks and then gets swept away by a prince in the last act" over and over like the classic movies were. The Fox and the Hound is one of the most genuine and emotional movies they've ever done, easily on par with their highest-rated films in terms of actual storytelling.
The Disney company is nothing but a husk now. The soul went elsewhere.
Wow, that's some Orwellian nightmare fuel
The Cleopatra Netflix documentary controversy when that came out sorta proved that that shit doesn't actually work.
Yeah, they gonna cancel Egypt?
I mean, some tried. It didn't work.
If they could, yes. We're talking about a shithole website that wants there to be laws for "misgendering" and any kind of phobic language. Frick, Ireland is apparently putting out a law for fricking MEMES
Man I'm so glad that show bombed and people called them out for their defilement of history. Makes me believe in at least a sliver of hope.
It did help that the show basically insulted an entire country and its people, so of course the backlash was going to be a damn tidal wave.
The good news is that not all Zoomers are pozzed wiggers with broccoli haircuts. Some of them are finally seeing aggressive blackwashing as a problem.
>What percentage of the UK population are black?
>Black British citizens, with African and/or African-Caribbean ancestry, are the largest ethnic minority population, at three percent of the total population
Over representation is a thing.
>a diverse cast of black, asian, and minority ethnic actors
Christ, it is so tiresome seeing this "diversity" meme. People by their very nature of individuality ARE diverse. To say diversity can only exist when there's a group made up of some white, some black, etc. is just flat out racist.
NTA. There's definitely a discussion to be had about diversity in relation to historical stories. But if you find yourself legitimately complaining about the racial diversity of a children's time-travel sci-fi adventure show, you need to slow down. Moffat can say "frick it" in that quote because Doctor Who already doesn't care much about historical accuracy anyways.
Not to mention it's a show made in England, where it's predominantly white, and was even more so when it began in the 60s. of course it wasn't going to have a "diverse" cast because there weren't that many ethnics around. If Japan isn't going to bother grabbing some white/non-asian people for their live action movies that feature whites and non-asian and just make every character asian, people shouldn't be surprise when a country that may or may not have certain people just uses the people it has locally.
I think you misunderstood me. I’m saying Moffat could add whatever diversity it wants bc DW is a children’s show that does not pride itself on historical accuracy. If you are seriously upset by that you need to calm down. Now when it comes to actual historicals that’s more valid complaint.
In general I think complaints about diversity are mostly overblown, and diversity is not really as big a factor either way as anyone wants to believe. But I also think the way some liberal writers talk about diversity is so self-congratulatory and egotistical it’s nauseating. Diversity (outside of baby shows) is important in that it (should) allow smaller or disadvantaged actors more opportunity. But when they try to make it bigger than that (to prop up their own ego) it can be a bit eye rolling.
>DW is a children’s show
lol
I was exaggerating a little bit, but it show designed with a kids audience always in mind. I mean they just had David Tennant read bedtime stories on CBeebies
I think you misunderstand me. I gave a reasonable answer; that they didn't have tons of people back in the 60s to call in for "diversity", so the calls for it, as they always are, are just childish demands for something that is actually far more shallow than they realize since true diversity comes from individuality
Wait, so can we do that with the holocaust? If we pretended it never existed, then the world would be a much better place, would it not?
>Wait, so can we do that with the holocaust?
Only if it was caused by black people.
Then I guess we can settle for Rwanda genocide denial.
Pathetic
Just saying that they could've had a slam dunk with Lightyear if they had just based the premise off from the Saturday morning cartoon rather than have that utterly lackluster movie plot which I can only fathom someone wanted to use Buzz as a vehicle to insert their original story.
If nothing else, Mira, Booster and XR would've sold much better as toys & merchandise than the generic looking side characters from the film.
A lot of the movies we see from Disney are original IPs that the writers are forced to change to an existing IP, so they become bitter and try to make that new thing their own without care for established lore or consistency before it.
No one can tell me that the Rescue Rangers movie also wasn't the same shit.
I would have been fine if the movie had at least FELT like something from the 80s or 90s, whatever time the movie would have come out during Andy's childhood. Had it leaned into the kind of stuff we used to see back then, even if it were dialed up to 11, that would have been just fine. As it is, you could swap out Buzz for freaking Commander Sheppard, and it's literally no different. As
said, Lightyear and Rescue Ranger very well may have been original stories that got slapped onto a preexisting IP so Disney could rake in some nostalgia bucks and probably also secure their hold on the IP rights for longer
We want movies done by people who like movies, respects the target audience and know how to do them well.
>What do people want from 2+2? AND DON'T SAY 4!
It almost scares me that there are people trying to legitimately push the idea that "right answers" for math is somehow bad, as though math is somehow now a magical concept where any answer should work because.... I don't know, they just want everything to be special?
Math is hard for some people because you can't just mental gymnastics your way into the right answer like a lot of subjects.
What you have to understand is that seriously are students whose entire understanding of math are memorized formulas. They don’t really understand how the numbers affect each other and just know that if they plug in the numbers here they will get a good answer. Which works well enough for a while, but leads to seriously struggling with later material. The goal of “New Math” is to help more students “get it”. Which is why it puts more emphasis of long techniques made to showcase how math works rather than quickly get an answer.
To be honest at a low level, the answer doesn’t matter. At that time it’s mostly just miscounting, which will improve, so it’s more important to see if kids know how the math works and why it works.
>To be honest at a low level, the answer doesn’t matter
No, answers in math literally do matter because 2+2=4 always and forever. No exceptions. Even when fed into different types of mathematic styles, those number will only create four.
Boo-frickity-hoo
Maybe they are trying to make good movies but they fall short anyway. A movie that turns out bad isn't always because they were being lazy.
Have you seen the initial concept art for the movies? They had a good idea of what to do and they decided to ignore it completely.
They didn't want to make a good movie, they wanted to make a movie with tons of other Classic Disney references to make the audience basedjak their cum out of their balls, something that worked with capeshit movies (until now at least) and they hoped it would also work with their "classic" movies
The execution of the idea is what's important. A great idea won't save itself from bad execution.
Give me a Frozen sequel that canonizes Elsanna. I will watch it 10 times.
Wouldn't that be necrophilia?
Good doesn't mean good reviews when you pay for the good reviews.
Make aesthetically pleasing art, coloring stories with strong emotional themes, humor, and romance from people who can show not tell and inject charisma and intrigue into their scripts, and then hire someone who's an actually targeted songwriter and composer to make the music and get talented singers to sing the vocal parts.
I mean they act like they're not cutting corners and phoning it in with nepo hires.
More stories from real folklore and myth
I want a movie that plays to Disney historical strengths, namely animated adaptations of classic stories. Outside Frozen I don't think any of their original stories have done super well.
Also stop making everything so sameface. I swear there must have been some marketing research that said their 3d character design is the most cost effective and all the executives made it mandatory during preproduction planning.
I just wish media companies understood that you can tell an inclusive tale by making it about humans in general instead of having to represent every single minority so your fantasy dragon talks like a 2023 ghetto Black person. These movies have no sense of wonder anymore. They can't help but beat you over the head with how they're about current year upper class west coast USA 'cause that's all the writers know.
Though honestly I think people nowadays might not even enjoy something like that. Maybe memes and cheap politics is all that works outside of porn
Suits always miss the forest for the trees.
>Catwoman failed? I guess people don't want female superheroes.
>Winnie the Pooh underperformed? I guess people don't want 2D animation.
It couldn't possibly be for any other reasons, no, they always blame the most stupid superficial reason.
>it's the right wings fault
Why are they always like this?
Being endlessly online will do that. Just like how there's morons on the opposite side who blame any kind of inconvenience on the left. Hardly anybody wants to look at things with a modicum of common sense, if they did, we wouldn't have so much of these "it's the right/left's fault!" all the fricking time.
careful, the directionbrains are gonna start calling you a radical centrist any second now
The ones that post that comic where the centrist looks like an uncooked chicken sitting atop a wall?
I don't know what comic you're referencing, but yeah that sounds exactly like the kind of moronic shit they'd post.
Movies that are about entertainment over message. I don't know why wokies thought they could get away with making propaganda movies when the Christians have been failing at it for 50 years.
>remake that turned cartoon mammals into realistic mammals vs remake that turned cartoon fish and seafood into realistic fish and seafood
Gee, I wonder why people massively preferred a movie with fricking lions over a movie with sushi ingredients.
Movies with solid American values and not the woke marxist cultural nonsense they've been pumping out.
Walt Disney hated communism for frick's sake.
>Walt Disney hated communism
I'm sure one day you'll understand why a notoriously anticommunist corporation keeps pushing a brand of so-called "Marxism" that is completely unrelated to anything Karl Marx ever wrote. Any minute now.
>Real communism as never been tried
Sure.....
Woke communist religion, please understand.
If the commies won, I'm sure uncle Walt would adapt quickly to his new marxist overlords. He could make a new Fantasia every year without worrying about stupid kids not getting it and he'd obviously receive special privileges for his international fame. Also Walt's big problem with marxism was the unions and they were forbidden in communist countries
>Movies with solid American values
God no, people dont want a movie preaching about dying for Israel and mutilating baby genitals
I didn't know Cinemaphile was so against circumcision.
Euroid's Law
as if we don't already have movies about that
>cultural marxism
yeah frankfurt school isn't marxist. they specifically distracted people from class consciousness. damn it why are conservatives so fricking stupid?
yes they are, and woke nonsense is a direct continuation of it, which is why it's better to just call it marxist instead of any rebranding attempts
homosexuals on Cinemaphile and Cinemaphile get super offended at calling anything Marxist.
>you're wrong!
>posts meme that specifically says it ignores class consciousness, but with a picture of karl marx
oh wow anon. they put a picture of someone next to something. you really know how to figure things out. you are so smart!
marx also didn't tell you to troon out, but you're all trannies
I never realized until now how normal 90% of these people look
and the other 10% i probably wouldn't think twice about if i passed on the street outside of the guy who looks like leatherface's mask
They don't look normal, you've just surrounded yourself with demons.
>thinks dead-inside shark eyes are normal
you live in a city
I bet you loved when Asha greeted the newcomers with a "Shalom!".
i bet you're mentally ill
No, u
>even if it's high quality
Wish's graphics literally look like a Gamecube game.
A movie with good reviews isn't a good movie. It is a movie from a company that bought out critics and site admins.
Better writing
No gays
No browns
i want beast to be wholesome again
I hate disney for the same reason I hate apple. Because it's infantilizing bullshit!
Do you remember those 'I'm a mac and I'm a pc' commercial from the mid 00's? Do you remember the music that played in the background? It was so fricking juvenile! Like something you'd hear come out of a baby's crib. I hated it so god damn much!
That's every disney movie is and has been for a long time; Infantile bullshit!
And because of such infantile bullshit. We have disney adults. I hate disney adults. They never grew up. They are adults who act like children. It dont matter if they have careers and families of their own. Mentally they are still children. So much so, that their own children hate them. Because disney adults ignore the well being of their own kids in favor of their own arrested development, and instead spend their disposable income on themselves and
their toys like funco, marvel, star wars, etc.
The last time I was in disneyland. It was infested by disney adults. I witnessed a grown ass man about 40+ years old. Throw a tantrum because his kids called disney world gay.
I foresee that future generations will hate their juvenile parents so much that in response they will reject and curse disney and all juvenile bullshit very early on.
And because of the presence of disney adults. Disney can start pushing garbage left wing politics in their media. Which any normal well adjusted adult wont not want their kids to see. I refused to take my cousin and her friends to see a disney movie last summer, because I refuse to let them brainwashed into hating men.
Loyal wives
>the queen moves away and starts going by "Grimhilde"
"Well, you do love having a tiny waist"
Damn, evil b***h.
We wanted TWINKERBELL!
>make a story set in Spain
>make the main character and hero a brown "princess" when the arabs at that point were a colonizing force
So Spaniards won't watch it, Arabs can't relate to a European monarchy completely detached from the theology of Islam, Hispanics can't relate to Arabs, Europeans won't watch it because they hate Islam, and East Asians dislike nonwhites in general that aren't white
Who the frick was the movie for?
The movie was a warning. Our ameribros know it's too late for them, so they are trying to show the world the consecuences of diversity hiring.
Sorry we're not as wealthy as 5 years ago.
I do not want anything from Disney. That's the point.
What makes me laugh is when the food comes out of the oven.
I want Disney to die and hope someone better buys Tron
Either uninspired slop that caters 100% to their nostalgia without adding unnecessary changes or groundbreaking movies that tackle new and interesting concepts and have emotional stories
No in-between, which is what they doing right now: you only get mediocre and uninteresting stuff
Just a fun well written movie that’s not trying to push a political agenda. I’m fine if it’s a subtle but subtle is the keyword.
>So what do people want from Disney?
Everyone, including the person who poses the question, are seemingly directing it towards men and "the right" by default. But that isn't the big problem here. Disney movies are losing people from the middle. They're losing women. In fact they lost more women than men with The Marvels, and I bet this trend will hold for Wish.
AWFLs are the one demographic that has actually shifted further left politically. So losing women cannot be explained by simply blaming Disney's leftward shift. This also cannot be explained simply by declining quality, because declines should be even across all demographics.
I can only come up with a few scenarios where all of these things could be true.
1. AWFLs are poor.
2. AWFLs are still in relationships with men who make decisions for the family.
3. Women's need to self insert in fantasy and fiction is not actually compatible with the ideology of representation, because the more specific and unique a female character is, the less able they are to self-insert.
4. Relatedly, because of their competitive nature, women do not like to see what they consider their own best qualities reflected in other fictional women they cannot self-insert into. Which means that women who self-insert cannot write for other women who self-insert, as strong independent women are not compatible with other strong independent women.
In short, women hate the result of the ideology they love.
I hate leftists, minorities, and women in that order.
>women can't self insert into specific and unique characters or ones with a laundry list of ideal qualities
5 minutes on ao3 would dispel this idea completely
The problem is there's no romance. Women will self-insert into anything, including men, so long as it gets a romance with the male lead and possibly a will-they/won't-they hatesex dynamic with the villain or vaguely gay undertones bromance with the male lead.
why is Cinemaphile blaming the supposed "target audience" when the target audience doesn't even want this movie
Because that target audience, who are the only ones with any obligation to this movie, are imposing that obligation on everyone else by asking questions like.
"Why aren't incels watching The Marvels?"
"Why aren't the right watching Wish?"
Because it's not made for them. It's made for you.
That makes no fricking sense. It has NOTHING for men.
Yes. That's the point I'm making. The "target audience" is not "animation fans." It's the feminist collectivist revolutionary subset of animation fans. Turns out there aren't that many of them who have money to spend. No one else has an obligation to this movie.
you're using the pic in OP as evidence when the supposed target audience don't even like it. as someone said, "twitter hates it"
it's a weird answer when we can see that no one is wanting to watch the movie. look at marvels, hell captain marvel, a lot of women don't like her or her film
also that troony (I think, didn't check) is being blasted so there is still good in this world
Twitter hates it, yet tge very types of posters who fit the Twittard stereotype like OP are the most upset about the movie doing badly.
But the stereotypical twittard hate it because it's literally consumerism the music.
Again that creature is being shat on, on all angles even. No one likes Wish, and trying to force an angle that there's a big one is hilarious when it's bombing way hard.
So what's OP supposed to be then?
I want Disney to go back to hand drawn animation. I'll even let them enslave all the Korean animators that will be forced to work for peanuts. Cgi will always feel soulless compared to high quality hand drawn goodness. I will also take them doing a stop motion animation movie like coraline
Or just give me a movie with classical sounding songs, with a good vs bad, likeable male lead saves the princess from the evil man/ bad lady/ dragon. Throw in some eye candy musical numbers where alot of pans and brooms or rats are dancing and doing chores.
>Spend a decade literally telling people "it's not for you"
>People don't go see your movies
>???
>Bankruptcy!
Ok.... A movie well written would be a good start.
I've honestly given up on getting a good movie ever again, how about a movie that isn't dogshit?
Kids just don't care about cartoons that are not anime or dumb shit like skibidi toilet.
I know princesses bring a lot of dosh, but I wish they did a movie with a male main character.
oh god the soft shading and the hand on his leg look so bad
To be fair, a lot of 2D animation doesn't always hold up when seen as just a frame. It's part of what made 2D such a great medium, because when it's all put into motion, any blemishes were either hard to pick up on, or much easier to ignore because they come and go too fast to really fixate on
Actually true, looks like whoever did it just went to town with the burn tool.
Original premises not marred by ESG bs
See: Coco. The plot? Exactly as generic as everything else. Yet it has a perfect depiction of 80s/90s Mexican poverty with all the implications.
I still want a Grim Fandango movie goddammit
Frozen was one of their biggest hits.
Nobody wants to admit why.
Elsa and Anna are popular with people to this day, 10 years later.
Pretty sure plenty of people recognize that it was a success, just that a lot of people are able to point out where it has flaws. Like a twist villain who feels like he turns evil for no reason other than shock value, among other complains that have been brought up over the years
A good ol romance story.
I just looked it up and it's 3 white men. What a surprise.
You're fired.
*kills you and robs you to feed myself*
Whoops, try not violating the social contract over petty politics next time
This guy probably thinks that one tiktoc by the dumb b***h who claims "good morning" used to be "good mourning"
Nothing. I want them to stop existing entirely. They didn't need to survive past the 60s.
You do know that people can learn about shit said on tiktoc without actually going to the site, right?
All white cast with traditional gender roles and heterosexual romance.
Instant fricking hit. Would print money.
Are you a newbie or a moron? Guessing so because only a newbie or a moron would ape out like this over a fricking anecdotal comment, but hey, tards gotta tard, huh?
and apparently waste 20 minutes looking up shitpost images because of their brainrot
>WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM DISNEY
Less woke
Less peeminist
>you must be x because you mentioned this one thing
Go be a moronic Black person elsewhere, newhomosexual
That's right, go search up your precious images, dipshit
A good movie
You can't say that, chudaling!
The real answer is, it's stale.
Regardless of quality, people are bored with the same shit they've been for over a decade now, and Disney is slow and borderline incapable of change. They flooded the market with Capeshit and now people are sick of it, because capeshit has been the major tentpole release for years now and it finally broke. The "quirky and relateably" Disney protagonist has been a thing over a decade and was probably played out by Moana, and now people want something else.
The issue with Disney is that they are VERY averse to change, think about how long the slump they had was before the Disney renaissance, think about the 2000s and how nobody gave a shit until Tangled.
For whatever you might say about Barbie, or FNAF, or Digital Circus, they are providing things Disney themselves can't, and that is something different from what has been put out for years.
I hate to be one of those obnoxious butthole who claims everything is Spider-Verse inspired, but Disney NEEDS something that vein to stay relevant. And I don't mean the half assed Wish attempt where they put a watercolor filter and said it was "2D" inspired, but something genuinely out there with the style, and a entirely different genre while they're at it.
Here's something the big wigs don't understand until it bites them in the ass. Movies are a business, this is true, and it's often the best best to do the safest option the please the crowd, but it also requires RISK, because you can't and shouldn't rely on what worked in the past all the time, because it won't always works despite how it may seem and that's when you need to take a chance on more risky projects, get out of your comfort zone and embrace something different, but that is what the people want right now.
Anno doesn't like Disney but he likes the old Tex Avery and MGM shorts
Just what you'd expect from the master.
kek
And that was late 90s
it's good to understand where your true power lies
The secret to saving Western Animation is to get more autistic people involved.
They have to be the right kind of autistic, the kind dedicated to one craft their whole life. And autists hate other autists more than anyone so they need normie wranglers.
Isn't it just that the movie will be on Disney+ next week, and they are already paying through the nose for that?
FNAF was on Peawiener and it still made bank in the box office.
Helps that the FNAF movie was also a passion project by the creator who got fed up with Disney's bullshit
Sauce on it going to D+ next week? If that were true, it wouldn't have even made it 2 weeks in theaters.
>DON'T SAY A "GOOD" MOVIE, THAT'S NOT A REAL ANSWER
People want a good STORY. That is literally all they want.
Animation can be meh, but if the story's good nobody cares. But even astonishing animation cannot save a bad story. You want to preach a lesson? Go for it! But do it with a good story, not at the expense of a good story. You want to use characters most people won't identify with? Do it! Use them to tell a GOOD story, and they might start to.
A GOOD story is one where the audience walks out feeling it was worth their time and attention. They got emotionally invested, and in return got a big emotional payoff. They got to feel triumph, or delight, or grief, or dismay… SOMETHING that was worth it.
There are tons of formulas, but they produce flops just as easily as hits. There are only 3 things you need to do to tell a good story, and it seems like Disney has forgotten them all lately. At the very least, you must give us:
(1) One main character we can ROOT for. We don't need to identify with him or like him, but we need to WANT him to succeed.
(2) He must have clear goals that clearly MATTER. When we emotionally sense it's fricking important to him, we'll root for him, and care what happens.
(3) The ending must be truly SATISFYING. (Most flops fail here.) Victory has to be earned, and by the character's own merits (heros heroically, tricksters by outsmarting, etc.). Tragedy must also be earned, by his own faults. The reveal made us jump in our seats. The punchline had us roaring. Anything else, and we feel cheated, let down. The story sucked. But do it right, and we leave with that powerful emotional payoff, and go tell our friends they have to see it.
Disney doesn't frick up all 3 in every movie, but you only need to frick up 1. That they have been doing a lot.
>But even astonishing animation cannot save a bad story.
I mean, it kind of can, even if at most you get is a movie where certain snippets enjoy popularity because the animation was really great during scene or two. It's certainly rare for anything animated to have a trash story but stellar animation from start to end, with maybe a few works here an there.
>even if at most you get is a movie where certain snippets enjoy popularity because the animation was really great during scene or two
that's not really saving it though, since a situation like that doesn't really tend to translate into financial success.
Maybe not success financially, but if the animation is enough to enjoy popularity many years later, that's still something. Thief and the Cobbler is probably one such example since even in the cuts that remove the unnecessary ad-libbed dialogue, the film's story is still pretty flimsy. That said, many people adore the animation, even if some parts do feel like they could have been shorter. Again, it is a rarity that the animation of something will live on while the story side maybe gets some attention here and there, even if these days it's just fans of that film and Aladdin squabblilng
But she's right. The success of these films feels almost arbitrary.
Wish's failure is far from arbitrary. It's really not a good story. The heroine isn't a very fleshed-out character. The plot feels like you've seen it a million times before. It's stuffed with too many characters. It doesn't take long to stop caring what happens. There's only one halfway-decent song. The animation is weird. Nobody's leaving the theater saying "that was great!" and telling their friends they have to see it.
Plus, not that many wanted to see it in the first place. Disney's marketing made it seem like an anniversary recap of stuff we've seen in their other movies, instead of the fresh and new story they were trying to make. And film reviewers didn't have much nice to say about it when it came out. Going to the movies is a very expensive treat, and nobody's going to drop a day's pay taking their kids to a movie that's not good. They'd rather just wait for it to hit Disney+, and let the kids watch it themselves if they want to.
Those are all very good reasons for a movie to flop. It's not bad luck, and it's not arbitrary. It's not about wokeness or diversity. They didn't make a good story that people would want to see, period. It's nobody's fault but their own.
Wish is an irrefutable sign that Disney has brand damage, in the same way DC movies have. Bad movies from big studios still tend to get big first weekends, with word of mouth affecting the following week. Wish's opening indicates a loss of faith, or a disdain for Disney itself.
At this point, anyone asking why these movies are failing are insincere or intentionally obtuse. There is an entire economic ecosystem that has sprung up comprising anti-woke youtube personalities who spend more time shitting on things they hate than promoting what they love, and media shills paid by Disney to defend and diminish criticisms through gaslighting and character assassination. Disney knows what's going on. They admitted they're getting reputational damage because of their politics in their own 10-K filing. Funny thing, calling people names and dismissing their opinions does not change them. It hardens them.
You dramatically overestimate your share of the market
The Disney brand is fine, people are specifically tired of superhero movies and these terrible 3D princess entries that have no good songs
>The Disney brand is fine, people are specifically tired of most of the Disney brand
>The Disney brand is fine
>He says, while Disney is bleeding money like a pinata in the shape of a slice of Swiss cheese
We want to not have movies designed to denigrate and insult us.
>Critical reviews...
Have never been a sign of quality in the public eye.
Disney just isn't very good at marketing right now and they're not putting their best foot forward with their last couple of movies. They lack a big reliable director or studio head, all their star composers are third party that can just say no (Lopez, Miranda), they gutted Pixar, and their current slate of ideas are pretty lame. They're also rapidly running out of good will towards all three pillars (marvel, star wars, musicals/princesses).
They need to take stock of their departments, hire someone that isn't Metzger or Menken as a staff composer, and try to just make one movie that can stand next to Ashman's work.
I don't know if they can.
I want more cute pairings and less queerbait
Is anyone gonna acknowledge she answers her own question? Pretty much every movie post-pandemic made way less because we all learned how little we like theaters. Barbenheimer was the exception that proved the rule
Wish had no good songs.
Encanto was carried by good songs.
Shit, nobody cared about the movie until they realized it had We don't talk about Bruno.
Encanto was carried by 30 year old white women who still live with their disappointed parents self-inserting onto Mirabel
I don't want my children to enjoy Disney so I have them watch a pot-pourri of random shit and fill the "Disney" gap with Miyazaki.
My daughter's favorite movie is Ponyo. She didn't like Da Shotty Moormaid.
The short answer is I don't want my kids watching Disney at all.
Ponyo's pretty hilarious.
Pre-1968 Disney is worth bothering with.
Stop making movies that pander to a demographic that 1. Doesn’t watch them and 2. Is never happy
If you mean twitter, they watched it and probably multiple times. It's just that they're a vocal minority and don't represent the mainstream
Supposedly not since twitter is one of the places they complain the most. They also said they were gonna boycott it.
An apology.
Their lives and childhood back, because China (now Vietnam) stole the only job they will ever be capable of and they have to rely on FICTION to full in a hole they have which they DAMN KNOW will never fit but they try to make it fit with no success.
Thats the only reason why you're here.
Everybody form a conga line into the next thread!
Take a lesson from Adam Sandler’s Leo.
Make a heart felt story that doesn’t talk down to kids.
Maybe even use more cute animal creatures like Zootopia.
A movie made in good faith that isn't quippy or filled with jokey sidekicks, awful art, self-insert Mary Sues for the writers, or postmodern ideology. Something that isn't afraid to lean into a spiritualist/romanticist message, like many of the classic Disney movies did. And also recognise that even the sappiest of princess love stories needs to have something that appeals to boys (attractive and endearing female characters, and masculine+heroic male characters).
And MAKE A TRADITIONAL 2D MOVIE FOR GOD'S SAKE, even if it's digital inking it'd be better than everything being CGI.
I personally want it animated on ones and not relying on CGI to do the background camera movements. If you are going to animate a shot where you fly through a bunch of buildings, don't make a bunch of CGI buildings and trace over them, do hand-drawn perspective.
Wrong board
>only anime is allowed to appeal to boys
Enjoy your disneyslop, I guess
They need to realign their values in a positive way. Bring back family. Men and women working together as a team. No more girl boss bull shit. Enough with the "quirky" personalities.
Walt saw his movies as if he were telling all the children of America a bedtime story. To him, it was the duty of Disney to be a custodian to these classic fables, and to try and capture that sort of magical feeling a kid feels as he falls asleep listening to his dad tell him a bedtime story about gallant knights rescuing princesses and slaying dragons.
They need to go back to that. To live up to Walt's legacy, and try and continue his mission.
?t=23
>Wish was originally made in proper Peanuts movie style instead of the current "generic Pixar look but with no textures or lighting" meme
Why did they change it?
Dunno, I just want the thief back.
It looks too conceptual and viewers would've understandably drawn links to Spiderverse