The Disney Thread | Happy 90th to Donald Duck!

[vale9001]

1 minute ago, Boxx93 said:

But you're not remaking the original fairy tale, you're remaking the Disney version that everyone is familiar with. If you're not gonna respect that as a filmmaker then what's the point of doing the damn thing in the first place? 

 

Which brings to terrible movies. Creativity and fresh ideas can only make art better. 

 

First live actions Alice and Maleficent were already different takes- point of view of the animated movies (as Cinderella kinda Is too) so i don't know why at some point people started to ask for copy carbon movies. 

[Boxx93]

13 minutes ago, vale9001 said:

 

Which brings to terrible movies. Creativity and fresh ideas can only make art better. 

 

First live actions Alice and Maleficent were already different takes- point of view of the animated movies (as Cinderella kinda Is too) so i don't know why at some point people started to ask for copy carbon movies. 

Im not saying you should do carbon copies of the originals. I'm saying that you have to respect the iconography and the characters of the very movie you're adapting from while expanding the story in ways that thematically makes sense and enriches the world they live in. Cinderella and The Jungle Book are the only remakes that did this successfully.

 

All of the other remakes just padded runtime to fill unnecessary crap just to get to the 2 hour mark. Changing the iconography and how the characters look on top of the movies themselves being mediocre just adds fuel to the fire.

Edited July 16, 2023 by Boxx93

[TwoMisfits]

49 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

It’s so obvious when people are going out of their way to hate on shit that it is kinda hilarious.

 

Also, this right here:

 

 

 

 

My problem with the released pics is that everything in the scene looks cheap...It looks like someone headed to the thrift shop and said "find me clothes for the 7 magical creatures and princess.  I don't care what they are (what era, what color, what pattern, etc), just get the right sizes and we'll toss them together on each person and hope for the best."

 

And I might accept them as being cheap if they were torn, dirty, ill-fitting...but no, it's just brand new ugly, mismatching, cheaply made clothes on everyone, including the stand in princess...

 

Maybe Disney is finally trying to hold down a budget, but there's got to be a better way...

[ZattMurdock]

1 minute ago, Boxx93 said:

Im not saying you should do carbon copies if the originals. I'm saying that you have to respect the iconography and the characters of the very movie you're adapting from while expanding the story in ways that thematically makes sense and enriches the world they live in. Cinderella and The Jungle Book are the only remakes that did this successfully.

 

All of the other remakes just padded runtime to fill unnecessary crap just to get to the 2 hour mark. 

People seem to love The Little Mermaid. A lot of the chuds problem circles around that Snow White isn’t "white" enough. Come on, give me a fucking break, this is fairytale stories for kids, you don’t get less harmless than that, people crying for disrespect of the original Disney cartoons are full of shit. Sad, old chuds with nothing better to do other than be complete creeps in the internet. 

[ZattMurdock]

1 minute ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

My problem with the released pics is that everything in the scene looks cheap...It looks like someone headed to the thrift shop and said "find me clothes for the 7 magical creatures and princess.  I don't care what they are (what era, what color, what pattern, etc), just get the right sizes and we'll toss them together on each person and hope for the best."

 

And I might accept them as being cheap if they were torn, dirty, ill-fitting...but no, it's just brand new ugly, mismatching, cheaply made clothes on everyone, including the stand in princess...

 

Maybe Disney is finally trying to hold down a budget, but there's got to be a better way...

I can’t believe you wrote three paragraphs about what is obviously leaked scenes from afar that are obviously not going to influence how a film is going to look. I won’t even bother try to "debate" this because it’s hilariously petty.

[TwoMisfits]

3 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

I can’t believe you wrote three paragraphs about what is obviously leaked scenes from afar that are obviously not going to influence how a film is going to look. I won’t even bother try to "debate" this because it’s hilariously petty.

 

It's not petty.  It's what people are reacting to.  Just like 1st released Sonic image (that got changed when folks were like WTF is that image).  When you see the 8, you're like "that wasn't what I expected for my characters."

 

I mean, does this seem like good costuming to you?  I mean, the princes outfit looks like the $40 Halloween costume for 4 year olds from 10 years ago - I may have even had the dress and exact material...and I didn't buy the expensive version...

Edited July 16, 2023 by TwoMisfits

[Darth Lehnsherr]

I mean with live action remakes you open yourself up to comparisons to the original animated version especially if it's a popular one. The gain of having an established audience verses the added scrutiny whether fairly or unfairly. 

 

Anyways Disney has mined most of their 90s movies so they either take an actual risk of trying to remake something like Treasure Planet or remake the 2010s which is already happening with Moana (big mistake I'd rather them do sequels first).

[ZattMurdock]

5 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

It's not petty.  It's what people are reacting to.  Just like 1st released Sonic image (that got changed when folks were like WTF is that image).  When you see the 8, you're like "that wasn't what I expected for my characters."

 

I mean, does this seem like good costuming to you?  I mean, the princes outfit looks like the $40 Halloween costume for 4 year olds from 10 years ago - I may have even had the dress and exact material...and I didn't buy the expensive version...

 

We don’t even have context of what those images are. It could be a rehearsal table reading for all we know. And no, comparing this with Sonic won’t suffice, that leaked a full blown CGI of what the original look would be. It’s just a bunch of old people being weird because woke Disney or what have you. Absolute non sense.

[TwoMisfits]

Just now, ZattMurdock said:

 

We don’t even have context of what those images are. It could be a rehearsal table reading for all we know. And no, comparing this with Sonic won’t suffice, that leaked a full blown CGI of what the original look would be. It’s just a bunch of old people being weird because woke Disney or what have you. Absolute non sense.

 

Both were leaks with no context (and no knowledge of who leaked).  One company reacted and adjusted.  We'll see what happens here.

[Boxx93]

15 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

People seem to love The Little Mermaid. A lot of the chuds problem circles around that Snow White isn’t "white" enough. Come on, give me a fucking break, this is fairytale stories for kids, you don’t get less harmless than that, people crying for disrespect of the original Disney cartoons are full of shit. Sad, old chuds with nothing better to do other than be complete creeps in the internet. 

 

Its called Snow White, because she was described as white as the snow with black hair and crimson lips. "The fairest of them all". Its literally in the title. Making the evil queen prettier than Snow White already messes with the story because the Queen sent a Huntsman to kill Snow White out of jealousy of her beauty.

 

And Kids deserve high quality entertainment, not mediocre stuff. 

Edited July 16, 2023 by Boxx93

[ZattMurdock]

Just now, Boxx93 said:

 

Its called Snow White, because she was described as a white skin girl with black hair and crimson lips. "The fairest of them all". Its literally in the title. Making the evil queen prettier than Snow White already messes with the story.

 

And Kids deserve high quality entertainment, not mediocre stuff. 

Okay, I’m done.

 

[excel1]

8 hours ago, Porthos said:

 

I'll take the bait.

 

Who, exactly?

 

(Chapek I remember getting rid of potential usurpers, mind)

 

Tom Skaggs could have done it. Kevin Meyer would have definitely been a better choice than Chapek as well.

 

6 hours ago, AniNate said:

Iger is terrible 

 

 

 

 

....what?

[excel1]

2 hours ago, excel1 said:

 

Tom Skaggs could have done it. Kevin Meyer would have definitely been a better choice than Chapek as well.

 

 

 

 

....what?

 

This stuff saying Iger is terrible is akin to NFL fans occasionally whining "Bill Belichick is a bad coach" etc. 

 

If Iger became available, he would the most pursued media executive in decades. 

[Water Bottle]

7 minutes ago, excel1 said:

 

This stuff saying Iger is terrible is akin to NFL fans occasionally whining "Bill Belichick is a bad coach" etc. 

 

If Iger became available, he would the most pursued media executive in decades. 

 

Iger is not Bill Belichik. He's more Jeff Fischer. 

 

Sure he'd be very pursued by other media companies. He'll give you short term strength at the cost of long term health. Like most business executives. 

[Mr Terrific]

I’m militantly pro-union so I strongly dislike Iger’s comments. 
But that’s the crap corporate bosses say and likely believe in these situations. It’s like being scandalized by the Emperor dissing Jedi. 

[von Kenni]

All the films by Disney since beginning of the 2022. Full of mediocre or bad films and I don't think a single one reached internal expectations financially. Add their all the Disney+ shows that performed the same way if not worse which is in big part reflected in the ugly financial numbers. Even if Marvels, Loki2, and (forgot the third) would succeed like @Porthos said, it buys very, very limited breathing room for Iger fan wise which is a monumental IF.

 

With the strikes and how long it takes to change corporate culture/talent pool and produce new content, it'll be earliest at the end of 2026 when Iger's tenure is expected to end that some changes happen. He'll do something drastic like go acquire indy or other content outside their own pipeline and slap Disney on top of it even with the expense of eroding the brand in the short term. The boat turns slowly.

 

785. 2022: The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild (20th Century Animation) (PG) [Disney+]
786. 2022: The Beatles: Get Back – The Rooftop Concert (PG-13)
787. 2022: Turning Red (Pixar) (PG) [Disney+]
788. 2022: Cheaper by the Dozen (20th Century Studios) (PG) [Disney+]
789. 2022: Better Nate Than Ever (PG) [Disney+]
790. 2022: Polar Bear (Disneynature) (PG) [Disney+]
791. 2022: Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (Marvel) (PG-13)
792. 2022: Chip ’n Dale: Rescue Rangers (PG) [Disney+]
793. 2022: Hollywood Stargirl (PG) [Disney+]
794. 2022: Lightyear (Pixar) (PG)
795. 2022: Rise (PG) [Disney+]
796. 2022: Thor: Love and Thunder (Marvel) (PG-13)
797. 2022: Mija (PG-13)
798. 2022: Pinocchio (PG) [Disney+]
799. 2022: Hocus Pocus 2 (PG) [Disney+]
800. 2022: Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (Marvel) (PG-13)
801. 2022: Strange World (PG)
802. 2022: Disenchanted [Disney+] (PG)
803. 2022: Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules [Disney+] (PG)
804. 2022: Night at the Museum: Kahmunrah Rises Again (PG) [Disney+]
805. 2023: Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (Marvel) (PG-13)
806. 2023: Chang Can Dunk (PG) [Disney+]
807. 2023: Peter Pan & Wendy (PG) [Disney+]
808. 2023: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (Marvel) (PG-13)
809. 2023: The Little Mermaid (PG)
810. 2023: Elemental (Pixar) (PG)
811. 2023: Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (Lucasfilm) (PG-13)
812. 2023: Haunted Mansion (PG-13)

[Reddroast]

50 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

 

Iger is not Bill Belichik. He's more Jeff Fischer. 

 

Sure he'd be very pursued by other media companies. He'll give you short term strength at the cost of long term health. Like most business executives. 

I mean look at Belichick with and without TB12. It's a fair comparison imo

[PlatnumRoyce]

4 hours ago, ZattMurdock said:

Also, this right here:

 

 

I mean, there's a point about performative garment rendering by online activists but this is also just goofy. 

 

These live action reboots constantly make a billion dollars, the general public clearly knows and cares about "classic Disney films" and they're a staple of childhoods. Disney's going to spend 150M to market this film with expectation that this is a well known and loved brand/story they're constantly reinforcing. 

 

Literally look at any poll and you'll find something like "I want adaptations to be faithful to source material" as an insanely strongly voiced sentiment. 

 

That doesn't always matter (e.g. Joker's success means that no one really talks about how it has nothing to do with any depiction of the comic book character) but it's banal, normie stuff. 

 

I mean, does anyone honestly think the people actually working on Disney's $150M marketing campaign for this movie haven't identified "7 Dwarves" stuff as a core marketing challenge to overcome? I'm not talking about "will Ben Shapiro tweet a snarky thing about this film," I'm talking about people who see the film's teaser trailer while bringing their kids to see Wonka(? - not sure how timing works but you get the meaning. ) 

 

Remember that the default move is apathy/not spending money to see something. 

 

***

 

My broader 2 cents on film is to remind people we still don't know how Disney is marketing the film or how they're approaching this tricky stuff. The only public statements I recall came from the initial quick response to Dinklage's comments. 

[ZattMurdock]

3 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

 

I mean, there's a point about performative garment rendering by online activists but this is also just goofy. 

 

These live action reboots constantly make a billion dollars, the general public clearly knows and cares about "classic Disney films" and they're a staple of childhoods. Disney's going to spend 150M to market this film with expectation that this is a well known and loved brand/story they're constantly reinforcing. 

 

Literally look at any poll and you'll find something like "I want adaptations to be faithful to source material" as an insanely strongly voiced sentiment. 

 

That doesn't always matter (e.g. Joker's success means that no one really talks about how it has nothing to do with any depiction of the comic book character) but it's banal, normie stuff. 

 

I mean, does anyone honestly think the people actually working on Disney's $150M marketing campaign for this movie haven't identified "7 Dwarves" stuff as a core marketing challenge to overcome? I'm not talking about "will Ben Shapiro tweet a snarky thing about this film," I'm talking about people who see the film's teaser trailer while bringing their kids to see Wonka(? - not sure how timing works but you get the meaning. ) 

 

Remember that the default move is apathy/not spending money to see something. 

 

***

 

My broader 2 cents on film is to remind people we still don't know how Disney is marketing the film or how they're approaching this tricky stuff. The only public statements I recall came from the initial quick response to Dinklage's comments. 

Thank you for your essay about Snow White.

 

 

[Water Bottle]

8 minutes ago, Reddroast said:

I mean look at Belichick with and without TB12. It's a fair comparison imo

 

Is TB12 the MCU? 😄