Strange World | Walt Disney Animation Studios | Comes to Disney+ on December 23rd

[Verrows]

2 hours ago, ChipDerby said:

I think, as someone pointed out on twitter, Disney watering down their kids films and essentially removing villains has taken its toll. No, you don't always need a villain, but with a movie that doesn't appear to have a hook, a villain would help. I think that's probably a reason Lightyear failed. The villain was barely marketed, and then was mostly just a nothingburger.

This is a really good point too. The same thing is kind of happening with Marvel (there are villains but none of them actually end the movie as a villain).

[El Squibbonator]

My big concern is that this is going to have an effect on the kind of movies Disney is willing to greenlight from here on out. A lot of people have already suggested that Wish looks more likely to be successful because it's more in line with what the public expects a "Disney movie" to be (not to mention it has a princess protagonist and an animal sidekick for them to merchandise the hell out of). So if Wish is more successful than Strange World, which is, of course, a very low bar to clear, what message will that send to Disney?

 

Probably something like "Less experimenting with new genres! More generic fairy tales!" 

 

The last time something like this happened was in 1990. The Rescuers Down Under was a box-office failure, despite being the sequel to a successful 1977 movie, and one of the results of that was Disney refusing to make any animated movies that weren't musicals for almost a decade. The 1990s were a period of quality for Disney, but also a period of creative stagnation and unwillingness to move away from formula. And I'm kind of afraid that this is going to be Strange World's legacy too-- that Disney will take it as a sign that they shouldn't make any more movies in this genre. 

Edited November 30, 2022 by El Squibbonator

[AniNate]

I think for any animation studio to have hope of turning out some massively successful critically acclaimed sci-fi adventure, it can't be a director for hire affair. Has to be some kind of more personal idea like what Wall-E was to Andrew Stanton. The "vibes" aren't much of a draw on their own.

 

I don't think this will be the last risky movie Disney ever makes, but it probably will take some new regime coming off a more obviously "Disney" success to get a blank check to try.

[El Squibbonator]

As for who 

34 minutes ago, AniNate said:

I think for any animation studio to have hope of turning out some massively successful critically acclaimed sci-fi adventure, it can't be a director for hire affair. Has to be some kind of more personal idea like what Wall-E was to Andrew Stanton. The "vibes" aren't much of a draw on their own.

What animation studio do you think would be most likely to make such a movie? It definitely won't be Disney, but what about DreamWorks? Sony? Warner Bros.? 

Edited November 30, 2022 by El Squibbonator

[Morieris]

If WAG can't shove 900 IP they own into a movie, they're not going to make it.

[WittyUsername]

12 minutes ago, El Squibbonator said:

As for who 

What animation studio do you think would be most likely to make such a movie? It definitely won't be Disney, but what about DreamWorks? Sony? Warner Bros.? 

Either Sony or Dreamworks. 

[El Squibbonator]

I can definitely see Sony doing something like this (in fact, if you count Into The Spider-Verse as science-fiction, they arguably already have) but DreamWorks tends to err more on the comedy side of things. That said, they've been trying for a mix of comedy and action in things like Kung Fu Panda, How to Train your Dragon*, and Puss in Boots, and I can see that tone working in a sci-fi story. 

 

*Fun fact: Chris Sanders, who directed Lilo and Stitch, one of Disney's few successful sci-fi movies, moved to DreamWorks to make How to Train your Dragon. Maybe he thought Disney wasn't playing to his strengths? 

Edited December 1, 2022 by El Squibbonator

[AniNate]

Probably one of the streamers. Brad Bird got chubby with Lxssxtxr again to get a Ray Gunn greenlight. Apple/Netflix/Amazon seem to be the best hope for real animation experimentation these days.

[El Squibbonator]

A few years ago, I'd agree with that statement, but given that Netflix and HBO Max are shedding animated projects like there's no tomorrow, I'm not optimistic. 

 

If it's going to be a theatrical film, though, the only studio I can see taking a chance on something like this is Sony.  Maybe DreamWorks if they're having a really good day, but Sony is by far the most likely. Disney is too hung up on their oh-so-precious "family-friendly image" to do anything truly experimental, while Paramount, Warner Bros. and Illumination play to younger audiences by default, which doesn't leave a lot of room for trying new things. 

 

This is one of those times when I look at all the amazing movies in the CAYOM game, and wish that was what our movie industry looked like. Then I remember we live in reality, and I'm sad. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by El Squibbonator

[AniNate]

Apple and Amazon though are big ass businesses and they can afford to take risks more than Netflix and Warner through their other business operations. They are also aiming to invest more in theatrical exhibiting as well. I don't see Ray Gunn getting canned Zaslav style.

[SullyJake]

14 hours ago, ChipDerby said:

I think, as someone pointed out on twitter, Disney watering down their kids films and essentially removing villains has taken its toll. No, you don't always need a villain, but with a movie that doesn't appear to have a hook, a villain would help. I think that's probably a reason Lightyear failed. The villain was barely marketed, and then was mostly just a nothingburger.

We all know the real reason this and lighyear failed

[El Squibbonator]

Yes, that was definitely a factor. But whenever I point that out, people seem to be in denial. It's not just a matter of "animated sci-fi adventure movies never do well", because, as I've pointed out, some of them have been successful. 

[WittyUsername]

3 hours ago, SullyJake said:

We all know the real reason this and lighyear failed

If you’re talking about the gay thing, I don’t see why that would be a factor. 

[BadOlCatSylvester]

5 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

If you’re talking about the gay thing, I don’t see why that would be a factor. 

It is a factor, let's be honest about modern society. Not a major one, and frankly the movie wouldn't have done much better even without the rainbow elephant in the room, but it is a factor. Both this and Lightyear are showing a homophobic trend to me.

[ChipDerby]

1 hour ago, BadOlCatSylvester said:

It is a factor, let's be honest about modern society. Not a major one, and frankly the movie wouldn't have done much better even without the rainbow elephant in the room, but it is a factor. Both this and Lightyear are showing a homophobic trend to me.

 

I can't imagine a single person outside of a certain bubble even knew there was a gay character in either film.

[WittyUsername]

If gay characters are that much of a turn-off, then I’d have to wonder why things have apparently regressed so much over the course of just seven years. One of the biggest children’s shows of the 2010s was Steven Universe, and that’s extremely queer. 

[JWR]

11 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

If gay characters are that much of a turn-off, then I’d have to wonder why things have apparently regressed so much over the course of just seven years. One of the biggest children’s shows of the 2010s was Steven Universe, and that’s extremely queer. 

 

Television show audiences are a world apart from movie audiences when it comes to that kinda stuff. Also, Steven Universe came out at a different time and era.

[AniNate]

Well, Disney themselves has put out some blatantly gay themes in the Baymax series and in the Out sparkshort and even those didn't get anywhere near the kind of handwringing as their movies

[WittyUsername]

13 minutes ago, JWR said:

 

Television show audiences are a world apart from movie audiences when it comes to that kinda stuff. Also, Steven Universe came out at a different time and era.

That’s my point. Have things really regressed that much in less than a decade? 

[AniNate]

Not really. The homophobes are just more vocal and defensive about it because popular culture is now catering more to LGBT tastes and they're afraid of being on the wrong side of history, and they fear losing their last line of influence on their kids with children's entertainment.