Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[Indy_UK]

Of course they won't. They are already working on Maleficent 3

Disney will always have my heart but really really do deserve the hard time they are getting. They don't know their markets anymore. They are void of any originality and just don't seem to care anymore.

 

[DKampy]

BRING BACK HAND-DRAWN ANIMATION!

Seriously, it’s so much more charming than computer animation (which I know wasn’t the point of your post, but I hope you’ll forgive me).

I would like both to exist…. There is an undeniable need for more hand drawn…. I believe there is also an undeniable charm in some of the better Pixar films. For example

 

[TalkingHead]

They are already working on Maleficent

Iger is turbo charging the 2000s Eisner playbook. Brutal stuff.

 

[LittleBuford]

I would love that but do younger viewers also want it to come back?

I suppose one would have to ask them to find out! I see no reason why they would object. After all, many children happily watch old hand-drawn cartoons today.

 

[LittleBuford]

I would like both to exist…. There is an undeniable need for more hand drawn…. I believe there is also an undeniable charm in some of the better Pixar films. For example

I didn't mean to suggest we should get rid of computer animation, and I apologise if that's how it came across! I would like both artforms to coexist.

 

[LittleBuford]

They don't know their markets anymore. They are void of any originality and just don't seem to care anymore.

As long as people keep giving them a billion dollars for these remakes, tie-ins, and sequels (and it looks like Stitch may be the big next earner), it seems they do know their market. Cinema-goers bear at least part of the responsibility.

 

[Disney Irish]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Lets break it down.

"I just dislike when people frame it as half the country being insulted"

Meaning I framed it as half the people not actual voters. So that's the information that's being referenced.

"when its really less than a quarter."

Now your first part was infact referencing all people. And the 2nd part is part of the same sentence and thought. So if it's not half of the people, it's less than a quarter. That leaves 75%+ the other direction.

So yes I reread what you said. And it's exactly what it says. Now did you actually screw up the wording, or was it intentionally written that way to discredit my post? That's the question.

You are purposely leaving off the rest of the post intentionally so you can get mad because you want to take the second part out of context and make it about something else.

Here is the post -

And just for context, that 50/50 only represents less than 40% of the actual country. So whomever cares about this, as valid as their feelings might be, is only reflected in about 20ish% of the country, not the entire or even half the country.

I just dislike when people frame it as half the country being insulted when its really less than a quarter.

I didn't realize I needed to break it down further but here goes.

The 50/50 being talked about here is the voting block, which represents only ~150M total people who voted in the last election not the ~340ish M total people that live in the country, which is only about ~40ish % of the population that voted. Of that ~150M that voted, 50% voted for one candidate and 50% voted for the other candidate. Meaning that its only 20-25% of the entire ~340M people is who voted for the current occupant of the Oval Office. So that is not 50% of the country, its only 50% of a voting block.

So clearly the second paragraph is talking about how Zelger's post is being framed by many (I did not target you specifically because many here try to say the same thing) as her insulting half the country, when in fact her post is only about those that voted for a certain candidate which represents only 20-25% of the entire population.

No where did I claim anything about the other 75% of the population. You're trying to infer your own meaning into my post that clearly wasn't there.

 

[Chi84]

You are purposely leaving off the rest of the post intentionally so you can get mad because you want to take the second part out of context and make it about something else.

Here is the post -


I didn't realize I needed to break it down further but here goes.

The 50/50 being talked about here is the voting block, which represents only ~150M total people who voted in the last election not the ~340ish M total people that live in the country, which is only about ~40ish % of the population that voted. Of that ~150M that voted, 50% voted for one candidate and 50% voted for the other candidate. Meaning that its only 20-25% of the entire ~340M people is who voted for the current occupant of the Oval Office. So that is not 50% of the country, its only 50% of a voting block.

So clearly the second paragraph is talking about how Zelger's post is being framed by many (I did not target you specifically because many here try to say the same thing) as her insulting half the country, when in fact her post is only about those that voted for a certain candidate which represents only 20-25% of the entire population.

No where did I claim anything about the other 75% of the population. You're trying to infer your own meaning into my post that clearly wasn't there.

If you go any deeper into this giant hole in logic don’t expect anyone to rescue you.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

That’s not true. At all.

…is this a confessional?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If you go any deeper into this giant hole in logic don’t expect anyone to rescue you.

That’s ironic support for the king of the moving goal posts

 

[LittleBuford]

…is this a confessional?

If it is, God help us all! I'm curious to know what everyone's penance would be.

 

[Chi84]

That’s ironic support for the king of the moving goal posts

Goalpost moving is easy. Trying to untangle the unique blend of false assumptions and dichotomous thinking in the post he was responding to could result in permanent damage.

 

[Casper Gutman]

If it is, God help us all! I'm curious to know what everyone's penance would be.

I don’t even know what he thinks he’s talking about anymore.

 

[Chi84]

I don’t even know what he thinks he’s talking about anymore.

What’s important is that no one else does.

 

[Agent H]

What’s important is that no one else does.

I thought it was just me.

 

[BlakeW39]

Realistic dwarfs is just as stupid as trying to make a realistic CGI llama for an Emperor's New Groove remake.

(Not to imply that any kind of ENG remake would be smart...or any kind of Snow White remake, for that matter...)

Realitically speaking, actual people for the dwarfs is also not a good option, because they're not going to capture the charm of them either; that charm was inherently tied to their cartoonish-ness. It's just the least dumb option that makes the most sense with the "live action remake" premise; the result would be "okay-ish" rather than "WHAT THE HELL IS THAT!?".

The best idea was just to not make it, but Disney really wanted that money.

I agree with this, but the money Disney really wanted does not exist. Nobody needed this film, nobody wanted this film. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is 88 years old. Exactly whose nostalgia is this remake intending to milk? Should they be playing the film in nursing homes?

We'll see how Stitch does. Mufasa did a little better than I expected and Stitch is one of the only popular legacy IPs left that they haven't milked dry. I am hoping the film flops honestly, I don't want Disney (or any other corporation) to be rewarded for such a stupid product.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don’t even know what he thinks he’s talking about anymore.

I'm just grateful to him for reminding me of my favourite scene in The Sound of Music:

 

[Agent H]

I agree with this, but the money Disney really wanted does not exist. Nobody needed this film, nobody wanted this film. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is 88 years old. Exactly whose nostalgia is this remake intending to milk? Should they be playing the film in nursing homes?

We'll see how Stitch does. Mufasa did a little better than I expected and Stitch is one of the only popular legacy IPs left that they haven't milked dry. I am hoping the film flops honestly, I don't want Disney (or any other corporation) to be rewarded for such a stupid product.

Plenty of kids grew up watching Snow White. Nostalgia for it is not limited to people who saw it in 1937.

 

[LittleBuford]

Plenty of kids grew up watching Snow White. Nostalgia for it is not limited to people who saw it in 1937.

Yeah, I don't agree with all the posts saying that it was an especially bad choice for a remake. The original film isn't some obscure IP that today's children have no connection with.

 

[Chi84]

Plenty of kids grew up watching Snow White. Nostalgia for it is not limited to people who saw it in 1937.

I can only speak for myself but I didn’t grow up watching it and neither did my kids or grandkids.

I believe my mother-in-law was 7 years old when it was released. She may have seen it in a theater but she died 3 years ago at the age of 92 so I can’t ask.

Most people I know are familiar with the story from the Golden Books or from the parks.