The Disney Thread | Happy 90th to Donald Duck!

[thajdikt]

30 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Menwhile a still from Daredevil; Season 4 shows a sign in front of a church dated 2020. Which means this show will take place during The Blip..which is an interesitng twist.

Could also just be so simple as a flashback scene but I know the show is set in "present" day because the events of Hawkeye, She-Hulk and Echo will connect to it. 

Edited March 23, 2023 by thajdikt

[eddyxx]

8 hours ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Let's ignore the culture war stuff: about 20 years into RT's existence, we should all know the utter incomparability of looking at (pretty much literally worthless) RT tv scores and movie RT scores (which, whatever you say about them, genuinely capture a snapshot of critical sentiment for the project on release). RT tv show ratings just don't fundamentally work as a proxy for quality.  

For one thing you're literally not even grading the show, you're looking at "first 4 episode previews" of seasons treated as pre-release season reviews and for another TV show critic writing mostly takes form of weekly recaps + longform about something not season in review articles. 

To pick a random example (Marvel, since we're talking marvel): Agents of Shield seasons 3, 5 and 7 have 100% positive ratings [w/ season 4 at 96%], If they were graded as a movie, would even that show's biggest fan expect anything close to that grading? RT just doesn't work for tv. You could just as easily say "Unlike DC films, the CW's Flash has maintained a sky high level of quality throughout it's run as seen by "85-95% grades in seasons 5-7 on Rotten Tomatoes" Hopefully that triggers a Charlie Cale response. 

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_flash

Wow that’s a yikes, agents of shield season 4 is the best season.

[eddyxx]

2 hours ago, dudalb said:

Menwhile a still from Daredevil; Season 4 shows a sign in front of a church dated 2020. Which means this show will take place during The Blip..which is an interesitng twist.

This has already been debunked. Google maps shows that the sign on the church was there years ago. If you look at the date, it was right before covid quarantine started so they clearly just never changed their announcement sign.

Edited March 23, 2023 by eddyxx

[Willowra]

12 hours ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

I'm struggling to extract a good faith interpretation of this WandaVision claim. It's a female lead superhero pastische of sitcoms over time. It's very much not directly in the stereotypical comic book movie (aimed at 18 year old boys) lane and the show that was, FatWS, was not well received. If WandaVision had flopped or received online outrage it would be used as evidence of backlash. At the end of the day, superlative quality really wins out. WandaVision was pretty explicitly the "non-white male action-blockbuster" D+ tentpole of 2021 and everyone loved it. That doesn't negate any other arguments, but you can't dismiss it with a vague reference to Doctor Strange. 

If you go to Metacritic's tv critictop 10 tv shows of the year aggregations, you can easily see Wandavision treated as a top tier release of 2021. None of the other Disney releases get that treatment (though Loki comes closest). Outside of Loki, none of the others are close to hitting the "top 30" cutoff with most points coming from sites whose names/brands are pretty fandom forward.

"A [race gender] show" just is going to be a terrible analytical lens. e.g. Ms. Marvel has 2 separate variables here: "a high budget CW show" (teenage girls skew) and Muslim-American lead cast. These have nothing conceptually to do with each other. If there's a cultural bias argument, which one is controlling mass negatives and why? If you just listen skeptically to people online, it's clearly some genre/age-gender effect that feels out of place to them in established MCU brand. 

Critics: Ms. Marvel has gotten higher scores in both metacritic and RT critics' scores than WandaVision. So as per critics, Ms. Marvel is better than WV, but both are good.
Audience: There are reasons why WV was universally liked by both non-sexists and sexists. There are reasons why sexists and misogynists hate characters like Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel, and She-Hulk but like or have no problem with characters like Wanda, Gamora, Mantis, and Nebula. I can explain this to you in detail if you want me to.

[PlatnumRoyce]

7 hours ago, Willowra said:

There are reasons why sexists and misogynists hate characters like Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel, and She-Hulk but like or have no problem with characters like Wanda, Gamora, Mantis, and Nebula. I can explain this to you in detail if you want me to.

Ok, but that's getting to a potentially interesting discussion. Even if you think WandaVision supports your point, framing it as "leading into a white male film" just obviously wouldn't capture those dynamics. "There's a doctor strange movie coming out" just has nothing to do with any of that. Why not lead with this instead of a just-so story that reads as looking for stuff to provide fuel for dunking instead of culture war stuff baked into analysis? 

I just don't see how the categorizations you're making really hold up to tell us anything meaningful. If Loki had failed with audiences but not critics, I could craft a just-so story about being punished by misogynists for LGBTQ+ representation/some gender stuff. The fact that this didn't happen at least matters analytically to some degree. How honestly thinks race explains recent MCU success/failures? You obviously do because that's your argument but I'm just not seeing it. FatWS, and Eternals seem to be unquestioningly treated as part of the wider creative rut. Why should we affirmatively view marvel's recent successes and failures along racial lines? Does anyone think Oscar Isaac's Hispanic heritage explains literally anything about Moon Knight's reception? I wouldn't consider that an organic read on the data. What's your argument?


 

Quote

higher scores in both metacritic and RT critics' scores

I agree Ms. Marvel got good critic reviews but I think even the flawed "critics top 10" list stuff I mentioned really does show it's just not in the same level of reception as WandaVision (which was also one of the top __ most streamed shows of the year per Nielsen). That just has nothing to do with Ms. Marvel and everything to do with WandaVision. 

Again, I really don't think tv critics rating aggregators of their opinions of the first 4 episodes of a tv season are useful. They just don't actually capture audience or critical reception of shows so we just can't push this very far. The good reviews didn't translate into strong word of mouth audience growth a la Andor but plenty of well reviewed shows just don't find an audience.

 

[Willowra]

51 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Ok, but that's getting to a potentially interesting discussion. Even if you think WandaVision supports your point, framing it as "leading into a white male film" just obviously wouldn't capture those dynamics. "There's a doctor strange movie coming out" just has nothing to do with any of that. Why not lead with this instead of a just-so story that reads as looking for stuff to provide fuel for dunking instead of culture war stuff baked into analysis? 

I just don't see how the categorizations you're making really hold up to tell us anything meaningful. If Loki had failed with audiences but not critics, I could craft a just-so story about being punished by misogynists for LGBTQ+ representation/some gender stuff. The fact that this didn't happen at least matters analytically to some degree. How honestly thinks race explains recent MCU success/failures? You obviously do because that's your argument but I'm just not seeing it. FatWS, and Eternals seem to be unquestioningly treated as part of the wider creative rut. Why should we affirmatively view marvel's recent successes and failures along racial lines? Does anyone think Oscar Isaac's Hispanic heritage explains literally anything about Moon Knight's reception? I wouldn't consider that an organic read on the data. What's your argument?

Lmao, what are you even talking about? Loki was a white male show; you can't just forcefully find a misogynist angle there. Unlike Ms. Marvel and She-Hulk, Loki's show wasn't review bombed by misogynists. It looks like you're denying the fact that Ms. Marvel and She-Hulk were review bombed by misogynists. Are you really denying the facts? I'm talking about misogyny. Why are you bringing a racism angle here?  No one review bombed MoonKnight, so you can't forcefully bring up the racism angle here. FATWS was also a successful show viewership-wise; it has also gotten a high critics' score, and racists didn't review bomb it, so don't forcefully bring the racism angle everywhere.

[PlatnumRoyce]

eh, this is a waste of time. Look, basically lazy culture war dunks are bad and not all that helpful to nailing in more interesting causal claims which still can be culture war-y.

Edited March 24, 2023 by PlatnumRoyce

[Willowra]

13 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

That's literally your argument? Scroll up and read what you actually wrote. I'm flagging how You're committing yourself to bad arguments in an attempt at lazy culture war dunks. What do you think the phrase "white male show" is arguing? I'm trying to figure out why you're not citing other shows/films and logical inference is because you don't think they're white and male and that's relevant to your argument. 

The boringly obvious answer is that marvel's faced a generalized quality problem from crunched development and you can see that across a wide range of projects. 

Why would I cite other shows and movies that weren't review bombed by misogynists? I would only cite shows and movies that were review bombed by sexist trolls. Bringing up the racism angle everywhere when there is none, is a bad argument.

 

25 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

 Would the average well informed person argue critics liked FATWS? 

Yes because majority of critics liked FATWS & that's the fact. 84% score on RT, & 74 on metacritic.

[XXR & Friends]

@PlatnumRoyce @Willowra Y’all can take this discussion to your messages if you wish to continue it in any capacity.

[thajdikt]

 

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/marvels-victoria-alonso-fired-argentina-1985-1235360231/#recipient_hashed=4099e28fd37d67ae86c8ecfc73a6b7b652abdcdb75a184f8cf1f8015afde10e9&recipient_salt=f7bfecc7d62e4c672635670829cb8f9e0e2053aced394fb57d9da6937cf0601a

 

 

Looks like Alonso breached contract several times and after several warnings didn´t listen. Would almost think she wanted to get fired.

 

[AJG]

Well. Looks like Iger’s intent of getting the licensing business back to a level of sanity is coming into fruition. First New Girl to Peacock, now this. Wouldn’t be shocked if the very silly move of buying out the first run rights of every Fox and ABC show internationally is soon reversed too.

 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by AJG

[ChipDerby]

2 hours ago, thajdikt said:

 

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/marvels-victoria-alonso-fired-argentina-1985-1235360231/#recipient_hashed=4099e28fd37d67ae86c8ecfc73a6b7b652abdcdb75a184f8cf1f8015afde10e9&recipient_salt=f7bfecc7d62e4c672635670829cb8f9e0e2053aced394fb57d9da6937cf0601a

 

 

Looks like Alonso breached contract several times and after several warnings didn´t listen. Would almost think she wanted to get fired.

 

 

Wow Disney throwing her under the bus for Ant-Man bombing. Who would want to work for Disney after they keep throwing people under the bus?

[thajdikt]

Just now, ChipDerby said:

 

Wow Disney throwing her under the bus for Ant-Man bombing. Who would want to work for Disney after they keep throwing people under the bus?

She breached contract several times, did you read the article? Not everything in this world is tied to Ant-Man 3 flopping. If they were going to throw someone under the bus why didn´t the throw the writer for example? The same guy is going the write their biggest movie since Endgame/NWH? There are plenty of people that could be more suited for taking the fall for Ant-Man. Eternals flopped yet didn´t see anyone getting fired then?

[kayumanggi]

On 1/21/2023 at 3:57 AM, kayumanggi said:

DISNEY 2023

 

02/17 AATW: QUANTUMANIA

04/07 CHEVALIER (Searchlight)

05/05 GOTG III

05/26 THE LITTLE MERMAID

06/02 THE BOOGEYMAN (Fox)

06/16 ELEMENTAL

06/30 IJ: THE DIAL OF DESTINY

07/28 THE MARVELS

08/11 HAUNTED MANSION

09/15 A HAUNTING IN VENICE (Fox)

09/22 NEXT GOAL WINS (Searchlight)

10/06 TRUE LOVE (Fox)

11/22 WISH

12/01 UNTITLED DISNEY

 

I wonder what the untitled one for December 1st is. That's a dead date. So it must be a potential awards contender?

 

Was this supposed to be that UNTITLED MOVIE for December 1?

 

 

[AJG]

6 minutes ago, ChipDerby said:

 

Wow Disney throwing her under the bus for Ant-Man bombing. Who would want to work for Disney after they keep throwing people under the bus?

 

Failing to read the story is one thing, but failing to read a headline is INSANE.

[Ozymandias]

Hopefully they throw everyone at Lucasfilm under the bus

[kayumanggi]

 

[thajdikt]

Just now, kayumanggi said:

 

Rumor is Secret Invasion is in June and with them wanting to spread thing out September makes sense if that is the case

[kayumanggi]

 

[kayumanggi]