News The Walt Disney Company Board of Directors Extends Robert A. Iger’s Contract as CEO Through 2026

[_caleb]

So what you're saying is... in the case of Star Wars, as an example - Instead of writing stories that would appeal to the audience that spent $100 billion on the franchise over 40 years, they focused instead on writing stories that would appeal to the audience that barely knew about it and spent about $28.43 on it lifetime so they could try and "capture" that audience instead?

Think of how clear the writing on the wall must have been for Disney to do this!

Also, those audiences of fans from 40 years age have changed a lot.

FWIW - Go do a quick search with your search engine of choice about "Star Wars feminism" and look at the articles that pop up from around the time TFA was coming out. There were deliberate decisions made to move in the direction they moved. Maybe the people Kathleen Kennedy hired to staff the Lucasfilm Story Group had something to do with it...

You realize films are going to have multiple streams of messaging to help it find a broad variety of audience, right? Remember the 2016 Nissan Rogue: Star Wars edition? That's was to try to connect a particular audience to the film and capitalize on the fandom, but it wasn't the only marketing effort and it wasn't like the entire film was designed to sell SUVs.

Disney would be foolish NOT to have a feminism messaging campaign around any film that features empowered women right there alongside the nostalgia play for old fans and the Happy Meal tie-in for the younger audiences.

 

[el_super]

Is it not diverse to have different options that may appeal more to one culture than another?

It is diversity and it is still important. The problem is still the rejection of inclusion, The desire to keep groups and people out of stories where they traditionally don't belong.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Disney would be foolish NOT to have a feminism messaging campaign around any film that features empowered women right there alongside the nostalgia play for old fans and the Happy Meal tie-in for the younger audiences.

I still think Princess Leia is the strongest female Star Wars character, and she never felt like a feminist, she just took control of situations and was a bad a$$.

From escaping the prison cell, to strangling Jabba, to being a leader of the rebellion she was the true definition of a girl boss.

 

[_caleb]

That's fair, I do agree with you. I think the timing of when TBA was announced was what made me believe it was more of a box-checking, knee jerk reaction to what was happening at the time, versus an earnest effort.

I mean, couldn't it be an earnest effort that was also an attempt to capitalize on what audiences cared about with all that was going on in the country/world at the time?

Okay this is a point that I think is worth discussing more, and I'm going to openly contradict my own POV stated earlier regarding TBA being a check-the-box effort, as I do completely agree that a lot of detail has been paid to tell a differentiated story for TBA. Question is though: is it a good story? My two cents is that while it really does try to tell a story authentic to the Black experience (self-made, Black excellence, etc.) it is overly complex - which is a habit WDI has gotten into lately.

We still don't know what the actual story of the ride is going to be. But ok, even if it's "Louis lost is trumpet" or "you're the missing ingredient," what you might consider to be "overly complex" might just be authentic to the Black experience of the team. It may even be more than that: I could include additional layers that the WDI team thinks general audiences are going to need in order to connect with a storytelling approach, tradition, experience they might not be as familiar with.

However, my qualm is saying that fans have not received it well. Disney fans are not a monolithic group, and I think in certain circumstances, Disney should pay more attention to the behaviors and preferences of the broader buying audience, not just Disney fans. Disney Park fandom is one that skews overwhelmingly white, that's fact. And so it comes to no surprise to me that the fandom reaction to TBA will ignore the efforts it's taking to appeal to a non-white audience, which is the MO of the redo in the first place.

Oh, I don't think Disney fans are a monolithic group at all. I've been very pleased to see indications that Disney has, finally begun to realize that they don't just have one audience, but many smaller audiences.

My disappointment is in what seems to be an ongoing knee-jerk negative reactions among fans.

 

[pdude81]

It is diversity and it is still important. The problem is still the rejection of inclusion, The desire to keep groups and people out of stories where they traditionally don't belong.

Certainly exclusion is not inclusion, and I get your point in this reply. But "quotas" can lead to other types of exclusion.

 

[_caleb]

I still think Princess Leia is the strongest female Star Wars character, and she never felt like a feminist, she just took control of situations and was a bad a$$.

From escaping the prison cell, to strangling Jabba, to being a leader of the rebellion she was the true definition of a girl boss.

Here's an interesting article about Leia as a feminist icon. It shows she wasn't always widely seen that way!

 

[denyuntilcaught]

I mean, couldn't it be an earnest effort that was also an attempt to capitalize on what audiences cared about with all that was going on in the country/world at the time?

Those things feel contradictory, no?

We still don't know what the actual story of the ride is going to be. But ok, even if it's "Louis lost is trumpet" or "you're the missing ingredient," what you might consider to be "overly complex" might just be authentic to the Black experience of the team. It may even be more than that: I could include additional layers that the WDI team thinks general audiences are going to need in order to connect with a storytelling approach, tradition, experience they might not be as familiar with.

• Layer 1: Self-owned food co-op owned by Tiana. (what's a co-op?)
• Layer 2: Built on a salt dome. (salt dome?)
• Layer 3: It's Carnival and Tiana is throwing a party.
• Layer 4: We're missing an ingredient - help!

Seems a layer too much for something that could have been as simple as a trip to the bayou, celebrating the rich Black culture that comes from that space. As it currently reads, they could have done more for less while still landing on the project's mission in the first place: to inject representation of an under-represented audience into Disney Parks.

My disappointment is in what seems to be an ongoing knee-jerk negative reactions among fans.

To be clear, we're in absolute agreement here. I actually support, from a macro-level, TBA. I just think it's been muddied and as a result, gives a lot for the Disney Park fandom to clamor on about which in turn distracts from the purpose and meaning it's meant to serve.

 

[co10064]

It is diversity and it is still important. The problem is still the rejection of inclusion, The desire to keep groups and people out of stories where they traditionally don't belong.

I don't think "rejection of inclusion" is the problem here.

Yes, you will unfortunately always have a small minority of people who reject inclusion because of bigotry.

However, there is a clear difference between bigotry and the average American recognizing pandering.

I have no problems with Disney diversifying their character portfolio to better reflect our society. In fact, I welcome it... if done correctly. It has to be done in a way that feels organic. I don't want to be preached at. I want to be entertained.

Many of Disney's latest projects have felt (to me at least) that they are pandering to minority groups in a way that feels forced and awkward.

I can't help up think of Modern Family, perhaps one of ABC's most successful shows of all time. Not only was it extremely entertaining, but it arguably made its audience more familiar with and accepting towards LGBT individuals. I hate the idea that it wouldn't get green-lit today since the cast is over 50% white...

 

[Robbiem]

I still think Princess Leia is the strongest female Star Wars character, and she never felt like a feminist, she just took control of situations and was a bad a$$.

From escaping the prison cell, to strangling Jabba, to being a leader of the rebellion she was the true definition of a girl boss.

Exactly. I think the really powerful thing George Lucas did was to just present a world where gender and race didn’t matter. Leia just got on with it, she didn’t have a struggle as a girl against an imperial version of gaston. As GL said in an interview once the only racism in Star Wars is towards droids.

To me its much more inspiring to show that hope and inspiration from that kind of inclusive narrative than the more divisive tales that a lot of modern diversity gives us which only reinforces peoples prejudice rather than inspiring hope

 

[GhostHost1000]

It is diversity and it is still important. The problem is still the rejection of inclusion, The desire to keep groups and people out of stories where they traditionally don't belong.

IMO the problem with Disney has lately been the focus on forcing D/I and/or messaging vs good storytelling and entertainment as in the past.

That and poor decisions in their parks as well

 

[celluloid]

IMO the problem with Disney has lately been the focus on forcing D/I and/or messaging vs good storytelling and entertainment as in the past.

That and poor decisions in their parks as well

It is definitely this.
All marginalized groups enjoy good storytelling. Representation does not matter to general box office audience if the product does not resonate and brand rejection can happen there too.

Coco, Big Hero Six, Princess and The Frog, Pocahontas ,The Black Panther, Encanto....
And these are just examples from one company.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

In a way, yes. I see this as saying "it's ok if they have their films over there... as long as they don't come in contact with my stories and films over here." Separate stories ARE important, but that doesn't negate the need to have inclusive stories that shows proper representation amongst many groups together.

There's nothing wrong with swapping characters for different actors or different takes. It's been happening in story telling since time immemorial.

It crushes the comic book industry every time its tried (and they try it a ton). I'd like to say only Marvel Comics could have a series of billion dollar films in the marketplace featuring iconic Marvel characters (Steve Rogers, Tony Stark, Thor, Bruce Banner) and simultaneously let the malcontents working for them replace all of these characters in the comic books so that kids can't find them anywhere if they went looking for them ... I'd like to say it, but I can't because DC Comics has the same malcontent employees and would be just as dumb if they were given the opportunity (if they could get billion dollar films off the ground).

 

[Tha Realest]

What do you think should happen when the audience that spent 40+ years on the franchise dies out? Should the franchise just die out with them?

Yeah, those kids that came of age during the prequels who are…(checks notes, in their 20’s) aren’t going to live forever

 

[Tha Realest]

IMO the problem with Disney has lately been the focus on forcing D/I and/or messaging vs good storytelling and entertainment as in the past.

That and poor decisions in their parks as well

The creatives behind the only major ride under construction have trumpeted its empowerment more than just about anything else

 

[Midwest Elitist]

The creatives behind the only major ride under construction have trumpeted its empowerment more than just about anything else

And it almost feels fake, doesn't it?

 

[Trauma]

And it almost feels fake, doesn't it?

I would use another F word.

Forced.

 

[Midwest Elitist]

I would use another F word.

Forced.

same thing

 

[SpectreJordan]

Iger caused it. The inmates running the asylum were Iger's inmates. Whether that's because Iger is a True Believer or because he wanted to be President or because he was deliberately sabotaging his successor or because he acted in good faith and just made poor judgment calls is an open question. Chapek KNEW everything they were up to would be a disaster for the company but he was completely feckless trying to put the brakes on them.


One audience should be Disney's number one priority (at least when it comes to the Disney brand, setting aside ESPN/Marvel/ABC News/etc). Families with children, period. Instead they seem to really want college-educated childless millennial women.

Those are the people making movies/shows nowadays so it seems like they just want to make stuff for theirselves.

As a kind of millennial (I was born in '94 count myself as a zillennial tbh), I don't have a lot of faith in millennial storytellers. I feel there's definitely a decline in quality in recent years & I think they're apart of it. The corporations aren't helping but they never have & we got amazing stuff despite that.

 

[TalkingHead]

ESPN’s had a red letter day with college football fans. Another achievement for the Iger era.

 

[SpectreJordan]

I want to be entertained - that's the sole metric of why I will invest in a film or not (ok, some I will watch just to be in the know for some other continuity needed). So when Iger acknowledges that shortcoming and thinks it should be a priority, I will say "yes, its what I've been wanting" -- because I want films/projects that are entertaining. That's not a hard 1:1 connection to make.

I also like Films/projects that are more than just popcorn fanfare too... but if you have one without the other... you're going to have a hard time pulling me in. So this is why I really care less about "well this film is important for promoting... " whatever arguments. It's not what I track, and its pretty unlikely to make me invest or sit through a film. If it's there and great along with the film actually being a great film.. fantastic!

Things that break down barriers - I'm all for. But the thing to celebrate is the freedom that enables... not purely the act itself. Meaning... I care more that whatever creative choice someone makes is doable... then I celebrate them just for making a statement by doing it. A great example of that is the gratuitous shoots that were common in many early 80s films.. and has been the trend on a ton of HBO projects in years. It's just forced and overdone that "ok, here we get the one mandatory shot..." that it basically becomes it's own thing instead of just being a great part of the film.

So that's why I don't care for changes done in films -just- to promote something or make a statement.. I just want to soak in and enjoy the result.. not get tied up in the explicit action taken or why. I'm a consumer... not a film historian.

I think this is the big issue. A lot of modern creatives don't know how to actually include their messages in their art; a lot of them are very blunt about it, the type of stuff you'd see in a snarky Tweet.

A lot of what they say or show is actually important & should be shown. But it's just not done well nowadays. The writing & production quality are going down but they expect to us like it just because of what it's talking about. We used to get both.