Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Because he and everyone else has a right to express their opinion. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
-
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
Because he and everyone else has a right to express their opinion. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
You don't know that.
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
A lot of people no longer give their projects the benefit of the doubt until they prove them wrong. For some it has been more miss than hit by a long shot. Neither side is more right than the other. It's not wrong to expect a higher standard from Disney.
MickeyMouse10
Well-Known Member
I don't get why the Disney Apologists get so offended.
"I didn't care for the last Disney movie."
"#%@! &*%"
"I didn't care for the last Disney movie."
"#%@! &*%"
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I wasn't talking about just this thread my friend.....
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Okay, fine.
Fox&Hound
Well-Known Member
Has it been mentioned that this film will feature a gay romance? I found this news recently:
www.metroweekly.com
Not making a statement one way or another, but you have to admit that may divide audiences. I am betting now that they pull an Osmosis Jones and the "strange world" in question is inside the protagonist and it is all about growing up and discovering who you are.
Agree with others that the animation could be more interesting...
Disney's "Strange World" Features Gay Teen Romance
The animated feature "Strange World," scheduled for release in November, will be the first Disney movie to feature a gay romance.
www.metroweekly.com
Not making a statement one way or another, but you have to admit that may divide audiences. I am betting now that they pull an Osmosis Jones and the "strange world" in question is inside the protagonist and it is all about growing up and discovering who you are.
Agree with others that the animation could be more interesting...
MickeyMouse10
Well-Known Member
Has it been mentioned that this film will feature a gay romance? I found this news recently:
Disney's "Strange World" Features Gay Teen Romance
The animated feature "Strange World," scheduled for release in November, will be the first Disney movie to feature a gay romance.
Not making a statement one way or another, but you have to admit that may divide audiences. I am betting now that they pull an Osmosis Jones and the "strange world" in question is inside the protagonist and it is all about growing up and discovering who you are.
Agree with others that the animation could be more interesting...
Yeah, I saw that somewhere. Until you mentioned it I don't think it's been talked about yet in the thread.
It goes with what Disney has been focusing on lately and their Inclusion Initiative. I'm totally cool with it because it's not an already established character that they are changing. As I've said before they can make new characters and do whatever they want with them.
But you can't tell me Batman is Bisexual and Hermione is not Caucasian.
Ghost93
Well-Known Member
I think Disney just needs to bite the bullet and make a lesbian Disney Princess or Gay Disney Prince movie, where gay romance is the central focus of the movie. So far, Disney likes to add tons of minor gay moments into their movies to try to show off how progressive they are without having the gay moments be substantial enough to turn off conservative audiences completely. I'm not sure this approach is really working. These small moments are not enough to satisfy LGBTQ people wanting meaningful representation, yet conservatives are still fuming over small LGBTQ moments like the lesbians in Lightyear. So Disney is pleasing very few people with its current approach.Has it been mentioned that this film will feature a gay romance? I found this news recently:
Disney's "Strange World" Features Gay Teen Romance
The animated feature "Strange World," scheduled for release in November, will be the first Disney movie to feature a gay romance.
Not making a statement one way or another, but you have to admit that may divide audiences. I am betting now that they pull an Osmosis Jones and the "strange world" in question is inside the protagonist and it is all about growing up and discovering who you are.
Agree with others that the animation could be more interesting...
So I say make a movie that is explicitly FOR an LGBTQ audience. Let gays and lesbians have a movie where LGBTQ people are the protagonists, and a same-sex romance is given the same amount of storytelling focus as the romances from the Disney Renaissance era. I think if Disney does that, it won't feel obligated to sprinkle tiny gay moments into all of its other movies.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Hard to argue with that.
MickeyMouse10
Well-Known Member
I'd love to see Disney do a Gay Prince or Princess. That would be awesome and provide us with some much needed new content.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I think there is certainly an argument for making content that focusses on LGBTQ stories. However, I don't really agree that "gay" and "straight" content needs to be separated. If your goal is to create more inclusive stories, the idea would be to include different types of people rather than to create separate stories for separate groups.
As for making an LGBTQ+ animated feature, they will only do that if they think it will make money and I don't think they do right now.
Ghost93
Well-Known Member
I don't think gay and straight content necessarily need to be separated. My point is that the current strategy isn't pleasing ANYONE, and I think in the short term, it may be more beneficial just to release a completely gay movie. It may not make that much money, but it would buy Disney a lot of goodwill from the LGBTQ community.
I think the lesbians in Lightyear were fine in the movie, but representation that small isn't going to make LGBTQ people show up in droves. But it is enough to anger many conservatives.
And as a gay person myself, I'd frankly rather see nine Disney movies with nothing but straight characters if it meant I could get one Disney movie with GREAT gay representation than I would to see 10 Disney movies that have minor and inconsequential "exclusively gay moments." I don't speak for all gay people, but that's just my thoughts.
Can't comment on the representation in Strange World as I haven't seen it yet.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I completely understand your point and hope it didn't seem I was suggesting you were against inclusion as a concept. I will admit that there is part of me that wonders whether Disney including LGBTQ+ storylines in several films close together is somewhat counterproductive in that it makes the company an easy punching bad for cultural warriors.
Overall, though, I think it depends on the aim. If the aim is really to promote inclusion, I suspect that taking some short-term backlash (however minor or major) in favour of the longer-term goal makes sense. If the aim is to appeal to the widest audience, separating the two types of content out until societal attitudes change makes sense.
Ghost93
Well-Known Member
I think Disney is testing the waters to see how audiences respond to small doses of LGBTQ content before they invest millions into a project where the main character is gay. You could view it as Disney "warming up" for their Big Gay Movie.
The problem is, LGBTQ audiences aren't going to show up for a minor character with a few minutes of screen time. Yet for anti-gay audiences who don't want their children to know about the existence of gay people, it won't matter if there is a minor gay character or major gay character — they don't want their children seeing ANY gay people.
If Disney is going to take a financial hit from conservative boycotts, I think they might as well take the hit over something really substantial instead of something minor.
And frankly, if I were Disney, I would stop publicizing that a movie has gay characters in advance. It sets expectations too high for gay people and it makes homophobes think the gay moments are much more prominent than they really are. Disney publicized gay characters in Beauty and the Beast, Rise of Skywalker, Jungle Cruise, Cruella, Onward, Thor: Love and Thunder and Lightyear and NONE of those scenes of representation were big enough to warrant pre-release hype.
The gay character in Strange World could be significant, but I still maintain that it's stupid from a business standpoint to announce his gayness in advance. Let the audiences discover for themselves!
TP2000
Well-Known Member
This came up over in the PRIDE thread, but it seems to relate here since I remember discussing that Strange World with its massive $120 Million production budget really needs to be a big hit this Thanksgiving through Christmas. At $120 Million, it needs $360 Million in global ticket sales during its 60+ day theatrical run to break even.
But Disney's Amsterdam movie, with a big budget of $80 Million, just had a very weak opening weekend and will apparently be losing a lot of money for Burbank.
A great deal is riding on Strange World with it's $120 Million budget, so they need to be careful with the marketing and trying to score Brownie Points with the Twitter elites for having a gay kid in it.
Columbus Day Holiday Weekend Box Office Stats through Sunday 10/9/22
But Disney's Amsterdam movie, with a big budget of $80 Million, just had a very weak opening weekend and will apparently be losing a lot of money for Burbank.
A great deal is riding on Strange World with it's $120 Million budget, so they need to be careful with the marketing and trying to score Brownie Points with the Twitter elites for having a gay kid in it.
Columbus Day Holiday Weekend Box Office Stats through Sunday 10/9/22
Ghost93
Well-Known Member
Even if Strange World didn't have a gay kid in it, I would still be concerned about its box office prospects. The film is giving strong Atlantis/Treasure Planet vibes. While I personally enjoyed all three of those movies, each was a notorious sci-fi Disney flop. Outside of Star Wars and Lilo & Stich, Disney rarely has financial success when it comes to tackling science fiction.
Black Panther and Avatar are going to be the movies that save Disney's fourth-quarter earnings.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't think Strange World is going to be at all successful. It looks like a weird Pixar knockoff movie circa 2008 from some unknown South Korean studio. Which only reinforces my ongoing question... Why does the Walt Disney Company have two separate "Animation" studios in Burbank and Emeryville that apparently now look exactly the same yet create similar movies that consistently underperform?
That's not a sustainable business model. No matter how many fanbois try and tell me that the $8 per month subscription fee for Disney+ covers all of that and more.
Add in the Social Media tidal wave of upset housewives in Oklahoma that are upset this November because there's a Gay in the new Disney movie, and this script of box office failure writes itself.
Yes, they are. Assuming they're both megahits. They both need to be huge. Not moderately successful, or merely popular. But giant megahits that run for several weeks in first place, setting records and raking in a few hundred million apiece through early January. Good luck to them both!
But why weren't any of the other recent big budget movies from Burbank profitable? The money they spent (and lost) on Lightyear alone could have built two E Tickets in the parks, that actually fit their lands unlike Tron. Or at the very least could have been used to make WDW's 50th actually good.
So... Burbank just churns out big budget movies as a weird form of self immolation? Or just to prove they are Official Good People for a few thousand media folks on Twitter?
That is just not sustainable. Financially, or otherwise.
Last edited:
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I definitely think Strange World will strongly underperform.
However, the vast majority of their last 10 feature films have been incredibly successful. It's a little difficult to say whether Raya left much impression and Winnie the Pooh would be the distant one on that list. It's otherwise one of their most successful runs of ten perhaps next to the Mermaid through Tarzan stretch.
Strange World seems to have a fairly uninteresting protagonist. I'm not sure anyone is rushing out to watch a movie about a Fish out of Water Dad. It's going for the 50's/60's throw back family drama flare, but Incredibles did that so much better.
Most of what they showed at their Animation Panel looked very good, Strange World I was distinctly meh on. Atlantis and Treasure Planet seem like poignant comparators.
However, the vast majority of their last 10 feature films have been incredibly successful. It's a little difficult to say whether Raya left much impression and Winnie the Pooh would be the distant one on that list. It's otherwise one of their most successful runs of ten perhaps next to the Mermaid through Tarzan stretch.
Strange World seems to have a fairly uninteresting protagonist. I'm not sure anyone is rushing out to watch a movie about a Fish out of Water Dad. It's going for the 50's/60's throw back family drama flare, but Incredibles did that so much better.
Most of what they showed at their Animation Panel looked very good, Strange World I was distinctly meh on. Atlantis and Treasure Planet seem like poignant comparators.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
True, but I was mainly thinking of their post-Covid fare. That short list of films has either outright flopped (Lightyear) or been sent straight to streaming for free! (Turning Red).
Strange World cost them $120 Million to produce, which means it needs $350 Million in ticket sales to break even.
The other two holiday releases are worse financially:
Wakanda Forever cost them $200 Million, which will require $600 Million in ticket sales to break even.
Avatar 2 cost them $250 Million (?!?), which requires $750 Million in ticket sales to break even.
There better be lines around the block at every theater in America this Christmas, or else Burbank has some 'splaining to do on what they do with all that money.