Disney's Live Action The Little Mermaid

[Angel Ariel]

Movies are to make money and sell merch…

As it’s not sinking in: if you want “art”, you do it on a budget appropriate. There’s ways to get stars to to that too within the guardrails

You spent hundreds of mil…you need profits. How do you get profits? You pay actors people know?
Why do they get paid so much? Because people don’t have to think to recognize them and they have a track record of pulling in profits.


This has gone all the way back to Hollywood 101.

No one knew who Tom Holland was when he began as Spider-Man. (And the spiderman franchise had already had 2 relatively recent sagas in theatres with other actors). The pull was the franchise, not the actor.

Clearly Disney thought the pull of the little mermaid franchise would be enough. And based on the franchise’s endurance in pop culture and merchandising between 1989-now, they had every reason to think so.

No, it didn’t play out that way. There is likely no single reason for the outcome. Does the backlash about Halle’s casting play a part? Yep. Does the flooding of the market with remakes play a part? Absolutely. Is the movie industry as a whole still seeing changes in movie going behavior between the rise of streaming and the impacts of the pandemic? I think that’s pretty undeniable. Are we going to identify all of the reasons here? Not likely. Disney will adjust, or they won’t. Nothing we say here impacts that.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If that's your view, don't complain when they keep remaking their old films.

So if it’s Famous people it has to be a remake?

Got it. Makes zero sense

With 33-year-old Taylor Swift playing a teenage mermaid.

$1,000,000,000 without breaking a sweat…and alot of Halloween Costumes straight out of their sweatshop

It’s a “business”, right?

 

[Chi84]

I sense desperate efforts to make Disney look MUCH worse than they are.

Welcome to the boards!

 

[Jedijax719]

Movies are to make money and sell merch…

As it’s not sinking in: if you want “art”, you do it on a budget appropriate. There’s ways to get stars to to that too within the guardrails

You spent hundreds of mil…you need profits. How do you get profits? You pay actors people know?
Why do they get paid so much? Because people don’t have to think to recognize them and they have a track record of pulling in profits.


This has gone all the way back to Hollywood 101.

LOL-the very definition of a cashgrab.

If Disney does remakes, it's a greedy cashgrab.

If they do said cashgrab but don't make a billion, then they should have cast someone else who is popular and recognizable. Thus, they are a failure.

If they cast someone popular and make money, it was all a cashgrab. Round and round we go.

Baiting much?

 

[Disney Analyst]

Not sure about 580-600, but …

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I repeat: There are plenty of successful films with breakout actors, just as there are plenty of flops with megastars.

I repeat: it didn’t make enough money, a responsible public traded company figures out why? And does what they can to not have it happen again.

Not sure about 580-600, but …

Not sure?

Not close. This continues to be an exercise in chasing our tail.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

LOL-the very definition of a cashgrab.

If Disney does remakes, it's a greedy cashgrab.

If they do said cashgrab but don't make a billion, then they should have cast someone else who is popular and recognizable. Thus, they are a failure.

If they cast someone popular and make money, it was all a cashgrab. Round and round we go.

Baiting much?

Lol…

Nobody ever question live action remakes are a cashgrab.

Of course they are. From day 1

Now we have to “relearn” that?


This may be the silliest thread in the history of Disney forums. It’s a denial of fact.
But I’m sure we’ll eclipse it in defense of Bobby and all his FIRED execs…no doubt.

Yoi

Enjoy the movies. Nothing I say matters.

 

[LittleBuford]

I repeat: it didn’t make enough money, a responsible public traded company figures out why? And does what they can to not have it happen again.

It could have starred someone better known and still done no better than it has. Chris Evans didn't exactly propel Lightyear to box-office success. And the casting of the distinctly non-famous Mena Massoud didn't prevent Aladdin from making a billion.

 

[Figgy1]

Movies are to make money and sell merch…

As it’s not sinking in: if you want “art”, you do it on a budget appropriate. There’s ways to get stars to to that too within the guardrails

You spent hundreds of mil…you need profits. How do you get profits? You pay actors people know?
Why do they get paid so much? Because people don’t have to think to recognize them and they have a track record of pulling in profits.


This has gone all the way back to Hollywood 101.

Still impatiently waiting for the items I want to come back in stock There supposedly was a restock but I didn't click fast enough

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

No one knew who Tom Holland was when he began as Spider-Man. (And the spiderman franchise had already had 2 relatively recent sagas in theatres with other actors). The pull was the franchise, not the actor.

Clearly Disney thought the pull of the little mermaid franchise would be enough. And based on the franchise’s endurance in pop culture and merchandising between 1989-now, they had every reason to think so.

No, it didn’t play out that way. There is likely no single reason for the outcome. Does the backlash about Halle’s casting play a part? Yep. Does the flooding of the market with remakes play a part? Absolutely. Is the movie industry as a whole still seeing changes in movie going behavior between the rise of streaming and the impacts of the pandemic? I think that’s pretty undeniable. Are we going to identify all of the reasons here? Not likely. Disney will adjust, or they won’t. Nothing we say here impacts that.

Well then why didn’t little mermaid “pull” the unknown through?

We’re getting into a complicated discussion here…

I’ll watch the movie when the time comes…not much of a mermaid fan (animated)…but I appreciate its place in history and for Disney

 

[LittleBuford]

This may be the silliest thread in the history of Disney forums.

On that much we agree. Hundreds of posts from people obsessing about a film they've never seen nor plan to see!

 

[Sir_Cliff]

So if it’s Famous people it has to be a remake?

Got it. Makes zero sense

Movies are to make money and sell merch…

Remakes make money and sell merch.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It could have starred someone better known and still done no better than it has. Chris Evans didn't exactly propel Lightyear to box-office success. And the casting of the distinctly non-famous Mena Massoud didn't prevent Aladdin from making a billion.

So if your point is “there’s no guarantees”…I agree.

Yet it still didn’t “succeed”…and that’s Disneys problem to handle. They’ll likely get aloof and blame the audience…a tactic that’s becoming standard.

Bob should have to work for his yacht. Life is tough for some.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

On that much we agree. Hundreds of posts from people obsessing about a film they've never seen nor plan to see!

And fighting math and debating the goals of one of the largest entertainment companies on earth.

Fair?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

…I feel like there was an attempt at a point and it was in “invisible keystrokes”, @Sir_Cliff ?

 

[Angel Ariel]

Well then why didn’t little mermaid “pull” the unknown through?

We’re getting into a complicated discussion here…

I’ll watch the movie when the time comes…not much of a mermaid fan (animated)…but I appreciate its place in history and for Disney

No, it didn’t play out that way. There is likely no single reason for the outcome. Does the backlash about Halle’s casting play a part? Yep. Does the flooding of the market with remakes play a part? Absolutely. Is the movie industry as a whole still seeing changes in movie going behavior between the rise of streaming and the impacts of the pandemic? I think that’s pretty undeniable. Are we going to identify all of the reasons here? Not likely. Disney will adjust, or they won’t. Nothing we say here impacts that.

 

[LittleBuford]

And fighting math and debating the goals of one of the largest entertainment companies on earth.

Fair?

No-one is fighting maths. We're merely trying to expand the discussion beyond the myopic concern for profitability, which has somehow become the obsessive focus of this thread.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

@Angel Ariel

I agree with you…some of it is the “boogeyman” that was blamed practically on day 1.
Any adult can understand the race dynamics.
And it sucks.

But much of the rest of the reason has been highlighted too…behind the movie itself.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

…I feel like there was an attempt at a point and it was in “invisible keystrokes”, @Sir_Cliff ?

Maybe re-read it.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

No-one is fighting maths. We're merely trying to expand the discussion beyond the myopic concern for profitability, which has somehow become the obsessive focus of this thread.

Saying it’s a “success/failure” is fighting math.

That happened…repeatedly. Perhaps not by you…but still.

If the goal is to not be myopic…don’t try to score a “partial victory” on math as has been done for 3 excruciating weeks on this movie because polarization came into play here.

That is a valid debate outside of the business end.

This movie should be discussed just like quantumia…same basic slot
But mermaid had a much higher ceiling…and therefore a higher floor as well