LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I recall only Jaeger and Searcher having that nose (Ethan’s is the same shape but not as large). It didn’t bother me; I actually think Searcher is strangely (!) attractive!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
'Strange World' Disney's 2022 Animated Film
- Thread starter NateD1226
- Start date
Chi84
Premium Member
Here’s another article supporting the theory that people were waiting to watch the movie at home. I can say that after watching the trailer I wouldn’t run to the theater to see it. It’s a decent family movie night movie, but nothing terribly special.
movieweb.com
Strange World Becomes No. 1 Movie on Disney+ After Bombing at Box Office
Strange World is performing much better on streaming than it did in movie theaters.
movieweb.com
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
The noses are a little distracting.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I think the character designs of this movie would have worked better with 2D animation instead of 3D.
I find that to be the case for a lot of animated films these days.
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
And not only hasn’t seen the movie, but has no plans to.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
Here’s another article supporting the theory that people were waiting to watch the movie at home. I can say that after watching the trailer I wouldn’t run to the theater to see it. It’s a decent family movie night movie, but nothing terribly special.
Strange World Becomes No. 1 Movie on Disney+ After Bombing at Box Office
Strange World is performing much better on streaming than it did in movie theaters.
Clearly people aren’t boycotting the film, as it’s the #1 movie on Disney+.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
Not shocking at all. Clearly the majority of people did not skip this movie because of any crush a boy had on another boy. The way people are seeing movies are changing and the fact that this honestly didn’t look the greatest and was barely marketed is probably the main reasons why people didn’t go see it in the theater and also knowing that it was going to be on Disney+ in short time helped people make that decision to wait.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure that means much. Home Alone from 1990 is spot #4. Plus, didn’t this just get released last week? What other new content is it competing with? Do you think it’ll be #1 next week or in a month? If people still have Disney + then clearly they re not really the ones boycotting Disney or Disney +. I wouldn’t jump to conclusions based off people subscribed to Disney +.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
Of course you wouldn’t come up with that conclusion because it doesn’t fit your narrative. If the majority of parents were against it they would not be letting their kids watch it on Disney+.
Last edited:
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Are you talking about me? If so...
There was no boycott. What are you even talking about? Hardly anyone even knew this movie existed in the first place, let alone was there enough knowledge of it to mount some sort of silly boycott.
We will never know what caused Burbank execs to abandon this movie in the marketplace by not marketing it, after spending $180 Million to produce it. We will only be able to guess. Through this thread I've read some really interesting points and perspectives on it, and at this current state in the conversation I'm of the opinion that... (Read on only if you are open to educated guesses ranging to wild assumptions bordering on conspiracy theory, but it's all we've got!
)....Burbank execs got scared by summer '22 after the backlash and bad publicity surrounding a very minor Lesbian character mention in Lightyear. And Lightyear did poorly at the box office (not as disastrous as Strange World, but that was in the future still). Knowing that they had doubled-down on putting gay characters into children's animation, they knew Strange World had the teenage boy who was gay and had dialogue and supporting characters to clearly spell it out that he was homosexual. It was unavoidable. And test audiences of boys/men really disliked Strange World, while women were indifferent. So by mid summer Burbank execs think "Uh-oh. If we thought the PR on Lightyear was bad, wait until America learns about Strange World!". So they buried it. They cancelled most of the marketing for it. They pulled the toys and children's merchandise they'd designed and manufactured in advance from open distribution at Target and WalMart and DisneyStores for Christmas. Strange World was purposely buried to avoid as much bad PR as possible. And it mostly worked for them, to their credit! It slid under the radar for most Americans, and never got mentioned by conservative media during its launch because almost no one even knew it existed. It only is getting mentioned now in passing, in a woke-year-in-review type format. On to Disney+ which is burning money even without Strange World!
That's about as good an explanation as I've got, after six weeks on this thread.
It still doesn't explain why Strange World was released in over 4,100 theaters without any real marketing, but that may have something to do with contractual obligations with theater chains. If anyone here knows how that part of the movie business works and how theater slots get divvied up between films, please weigh in here! I'd love to know how that works!
Does anyone else have another theory they'd like to throw out? I'd be interested to hear other thoughts on this mystery.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
If people didn’t want to watch it, it certainly wouldn’t rank over Encanto at the Hollywood bowl, or the original Avatar which is up there due to the sequel.
The fact is, many people are watching it now, and it’s not being boycotted.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
All I’m saying is if I showed up at my sons school tmrw and raced the kids in his first grade class and won it doesn’t mean I’m fast or in good shape. Plus it was just released last week. I’m not really sure how streaming works or how long hit shows or movies stay in the # 1 spot but it would take more than a week to impress me.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
I also agree that Strange World has a great chance of aging well based on its strong points. But it’s still, unfortunately, going to be a movie full of generic sitcom dialogue and unfunny jokes. Maybe, as pop culture moves on and away from the never-ending glib sarcasm style of humor that nearly all recent animated films cling to (everybody talks like a character on “Friends” or “The Gilmore Girls”) the dialogue in Strange World will seem less been-there-heard-that.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Although facetiously many also have two moms or dads. It would be odd if they barred the entire Disney back catalogue (ironically including Strange World), because it features straight content.
Yes I do understand this perspective. A lot of parents simply don’t have the tools to discuss things they perhaps have a limited exposure to. That doesn’t make the content age inappropriate necessarily, it more speaks to the parents own lack of comfort. I do think this is the role for educators though, to fill in for parents gaps, but that’s a charged topic.
Not to throw it back on you though, but I’m curious why you’d also share that perspective (discomfort around exposing children) to a topic you are presumably more comfortable with. Not in the context of forcing it upon other families, but for example if you had a niece or nephew and a supportive ally in a sibling, why wouldn’t you go to one of those movies with them?
I do broadly think this whole Disney pushing the envelope thing with strange world is kind of surprising. Considering what they put out for kids in the 80’s.
I watched this as Epcot when I was ‘just’ 6.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
Yes, you said this as one of the reasons why the movie failed:Are you talking about me? If so...
There was no boycott. What are you even talking about? Hardly anyone even knew this movie existed in the first place, let alone was there enough knowledge of it to mount some sort of silly boycott.
We will never know what caused Burbank execs to abandon this movie in the marketplace by not marketing it, after spending $180 Million to produce it. We will only be able to guess. Through this thread I've read some really interesting points and perspectives on it, and at this current state in the conversation I'm of the opinion that... (Read on only if you are open to wild assumptions bordering on conspiracy theory, but it's all we've got!
Burbank execs got scared by summer '22 after the backlash and bad publicity surrounding a very minor Lesbian character mention in Lightyear. And Lightyear did poorly at the box office (not as disastrous as Strange World, but that was in the future still). Knowing that they had doubled-down on putting gay characters into children's animation, they knew Strange World had the teenage boy who was gay and had dialogue and supporting characters to clearly spell it out that he was homosexual. It was unavoidable. And test audiences of boys/men really disliked Strange World, while women were indifferent. So by mid summer Burbank execs think "Uh-oh. If we thought the PR on Lightyear was bad, wait until America learns about Strange World!". So they buried it. They cancelled most of the marketing for it. They pulled the toys and children's merchandise from open distribution at Target and WalMart and DisneyStores for Christmas. Strange World was purposely buried to avoid as much bad PR as possible. And it mostly worked for them, to their credit! It slid under the radar for most Americans, and never got mentioned by conservative media during its launch because almost no one even knew it existed. It only is getting mentioned now in passing, in a woke-year-in-review type format. On to Disney+ which is burning money even without Strange World!
That's about as good an explanation as I've got, after six weeks on this thread.
It still doesn't explain why Strange World was released in over 4,100 theaters without any real marketing, but that may have something to do with contractual obligations with theater chains. If anyone here knows how that part of the movie business works and how theater slots get divvied up between films, please weigh in here! I'd love to know how that works!
Does anyone else have another theory they'd like to throw out? I'd be interested to hear other thoughts on this mystery.
I am just looking for proof for this statement.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Loved it! Bought the soundtrack on iTunes. I even like the Clades’ song.
Its composer, Henry Jackman, ironically also did the music for the first Puss in Boots film.
Last edited:
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
And again if the reason why this bombed was because of parents not wanting their kids to see an innocent crush between a boy and another boy they would not allow it on their TV at home at all and it would have bombed once again but it didn’t. Bad logic Mick.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Yeah I mean there are a lot of Disney + subscribers and it’s only been a week and there is not a lot of competition.