News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom

[UNCgolf]

I can't imagine thinking that these tired tropes had any life left in them for modern film audiences.

Seems to me like another example of the nostalgia-chasing mindset that confuses the essence for the methods (just keep doing it the old way).

If people let go of this, I think they'd find modern Disney is much more enjoyable.

Do you honestly think modern film audiences don't care about love interests and (especially) villains?

I don't think there's much evidence to support that. Those aren't really tired tropes as much as fundamental elements of storytelling -- not that they are required in every story (and it's fine for Disney to make films without them), but that they have always existed and always will. If people didn't care about villains, the MCU wouldn't exist.

 

[The Lochness Monsta]

Do you honestly think modern film audiences don't care about love interests and (especially) villains?

I don't think there's much evidence to support that. The MCU is full of villains.

Yeah, I know.

Most of the biggest money makers of all time have love and villains in them.

 

[_caleb]

LOL, these tropes have never eeeeever been tired. They've been around since the beginning of time.

I don't get how you can rationalize what you just wrote.

You may have noticed trends in modern storytelling away from familiar tropes.

Most comedies these days show some degree of self-awareness, a wink and nod for audiences who find overly-earnest films to be boring retreads. The Shrek films are good examples of this, and really challenged Disney's approach to storytelling to the point that Disney changed pretty dramatically.

Villains (in those rare modern films that still have a clear villain) are now treated as emotionally complex characters that audiences can relate to. See: Kylo Ren, "Predators" in Zootopia, Te Ka in Moana.

Frozen eschewed the traditional "prince saves the princess and they fall in love" storyline for a more empowering, "I don't need a man" storyline.

Most Pixar films explore emotional vulnerability and internal challenges as much as they do "good guys beat bad guys" and "girl seeks true love."

In our media-inundated world, it's not a radical idea that people are looking for something different.

 

[_caleb]

Do you honestly think modern film audiences don't care about love interests and (especially) villains?

I don't think there's much evidence to support that. Those aren't really tired tropes as much as fundamental elements of storytelling -- not that they are required in every story (and it's fine for Disney to make films without them), but that they have always existed and always will. If people didn't care about villains, the MCU wouldn't exist.

Yes! As a fan of film and storytelling, I think we've seen a major (and fundamental) shift in how stories are told and how audiences receive them.

Now, I'm not saying audiences have NO care for villains or love or whatever, just that those themes have been explored (in some ways, really well!) and it seems like there aren't many interesting ways to explore them further.

As you point out, some of those are universal human experiences, so we will always connect with them at some level. But I'm saying people are LESS interested in those tropes (and storytellers are less interested in recycling them) than they used to be.

Many people (myself included) have pointed out that the MCU, actually has few notable villains. And those that stand out as memorable are the ones who are given backstories and rationales that sort of make audiences think, "well, from a certain perspective, they kind of have a point..." (see: Thanos, Loki, Vulture, the Black Widows, Karli Morgenthau-leader of the Flag Smashers) etc.

 

[UNCgolf]

Yes! As a fan of film and storytelling, I think we've seen a major (and fundamental) shift in how stories are told and how audiences receive them.

Now, I'm not saying audiences have NO care for villains or love or whatever, just that those themes have been explored (in some ways, really well!) and it seems like there aren't many interesting ways to explore them further.

As you point out, some of those are universal human experiences, so we will always connect with them at some level. But I'm saying people are LESS interested in those tropes (and storytellers are less interested in recycling them) than they used to be.

Many people (myself included) have pointed out that the MCU, actually has few notable villains. And those that stand out as memorable are the ones who are given backstories and rationales that sort of make audiences think, "well, from a certain perspective, they kind of have a point..." (see: Thanos, Loki, Vulture, the Black Widows, Karli Morgenthau-leader of the Flag Smashers) etc.

You'll also notice that the MCU films without a notable villain are generally the ones people think are weaker, though -- borne out both in critical reviews and box office results. That's not true 100% across the board, because the first Guardians film has a very weak villain and is one of the best MCU films, but obviously not every story needs that so I wouldn't expect it to be 100% true (and Ronan isn't really driving the conflict in that movie anyways).

Regardless, I disagree in general -- I don't think films right now are telling stories any differently than they ever have. There are still plenty of films that heavily involve love interests and/or villains, and there have also always been plenty of films that did not rely heavily on love interests and/or villains. I don't see much evidence to support the idea that something is fundamentally different about audiences (or storytelling) right now compared to 20 years ago, or even 50 years ago. That feels more like a "we believe we are different" generational thing (which is the case with basically every generation) rather than anything that's factually true and supported by real evidence.

If you're trying to argue that the very specific style of princess falling in love and outright evil villain is falling out of favor, that's a different argument -- but that's never been anywhere close to the majority of stories anyways, so I don't see that as something fundamentally different either.

 

[doctornick]

I was thinking it'd be cool if instead of an AA show it'd be live performers and puppets in a blackart/blacklight theater e.g. DHS's Voyage of the Little Mermaid.

Sounds good to me, it certainly lends itself to that sort of show lighting.

That being said, my hesitation is that it is always easy to cut live performers during lean times while an AA show (or 4D movie) would continue to run.

 

[_caleb]

You'll also notice that the MCU films without a notable villain are generally the ones people think are weaker, though -- borne out both in critical reviews and box office results. That's not true 100% across the board, because the first Guardians film has a very weak villain and is one of the best MCU films, but not every story needs that so I wouldn't expect it to be 100% true.

Regardless, I disagree in general -- I don't think films right now are telling stories any differently than they ever have. There are still plenty of films that heavily involve love interests and villains, and there have also always been plenty of films that did not rely heavily on love interests and/or villains. I don't see much evidence to support any idea that something is fundamentally different about audiences (or storytelling) right now compared to 20 years ago, or even 50 years ago. That feels more like a "we believe we are different" generational thing than anything that's actually factually true (which is the case with basically every generation).

Really? I thought it was generally agreed-upon that filmmakers were actively trying to avoid and subvert tropes.

Again- trying to be nuanced here—I’m not saying that modern films don’t have traditional elements. But films that don’t at least attempt to do something “new/different” with them seem to have fallen out of style, no?

 

[celluloid]

A trope is only a trope when it is done bad and obvious.

Like exposition, it can be done beautifully and enhance the story.

 

[UNCgolf]

Really? I thought it was generally agreed-upon that filmmakers were actively trying to avoid and subvert tropes.

Again- trying to be nuanced here—I’m not saying that modern films don’t have traditional elements. But films that don’t at least attempt to do something “new/different” with them seem to have fallen out of style, no?

My point is that filmmakers have always subverted tropes, though. It's not really something new.

Beyond that, I don't think that's some driving force for the majority of filmmakers today anyways. Avatar 2 is a massive hit just like the first film, and I don't see an argument that either of them does anything new/different from a storytelling/trope perspective.

While people point at Last Jedi as subverting tropes (although I've never really understood that argument because it didn't feel like it did anything new to me), it was also less successful than Force Awakens, which was about as paint by numbers as a film can be.

Top Gun: Maverick was the biggest film of last year and there's certainly not much new happening there.

Stranger Things is one of the biggest hits of the streaming era and it's a pastiche of 1980s films.

The MCU films also don't do much that's new/different; while they are fun films, they're generally very simple, standard stories (and are often drawing from comics written decades earlier).

That's not to suggest things aren't updated through the years as attitudes change (e.g., some of the very homophobic content in older films that wouldn't make it into a movie today), but I wouldn't classify that as something fundamentally different about modern storytelling. That's always happened too.

 

[_caleb]

My point is that filmmakers have always subverted tropes, though. It's not really something new.

Beyond that, I don't think that's some driving force for the majority of filmmakers today anyways. Avatar 2 is a massive hit just like the first film, and I don't see an argument that either of them does anything new/different from a storytelling/trope perspective.

While people point at Last Jedi as subverting tropes (although I've never really understood that argument because it didn't feel like it did anything new to me), it was also less successful than Force Awakens, which was about as paint by numbers as a film can be.

Top Gun: Maverick was the biggest film of last year and there's certainly not much new happening there.

Stranger Things is one of the biggest hits of the streaming era and it's a pastiche of 1980s films.

The MCU films also don't do much that's new/different; while they are fun films, they're generally very simple, standard stories (and are often drawing from comics written decades earlier).

That's not to suggest things aren't updated through the years as attitudes change (e.g., some of the very homophobic content in older films that wouldn't make it into a movie today), but I wouldn't classify that as something fundamentally different about modern storytelling. That's always happened too.

Cool. I think it comes down to whether "subverting a trope" amounts to an evolution of storytelling. I think the trend has been away from too-familiar stories, and you seem to be saying, "that's not a trend, it's always been like that."

I agree that Top Gun and Avatar are pretty cliché. I think that may be part of the point–they are a throwback designed appeal to certain audiences. But I also think that's part of what makes them remarkable--when everyone else seems to be trying to do something different, those films just do the same-old-same-old and sort of stand out for it.

Coming back to the comment that sparked this for me, I actually think some of the "modern" films which focus more on emotional nuance and "the bad guy is also a victim of circumstances" or whatever have proven more challenging to translate into theme park attractions than many of the old "bad guy evil" stories (Peter Pan, Snow White, Alice, etc.). This (in my opinion) is why some of the film-based rides (FEA, Rat) haven't been as well-regarded by enthusiasts (FoP notwithstanding) unless they go the retelling-of-the-film route; they assume familiarity with the films and can't rely as much on the tropes to fill in the gaps of the storytelling.

 

[UNCgolf]

Cool. I think it comes down to whether "subverting a trope" amounts to an evolution of storytelling. I think the trend has been away from too-familiar stories, and you seem to be saying, "that's not a trend, it's always been like that."

I agree that Top Gun and Avatar are pretty cliché. I think that may be part of the point–they are a throwback designed appeal to certain audiences. But I also think that's part of what makes them remarkable--when everyone else seems to be trying to do something different, those films just do the same-old-same-old and sort of stand out for it.

Coming back to the comment that sparked this for me, I actually think some of the "modern" films which focus more on emotional nuance and "the bad guy is also a victim of circumstances" or whatever have proven more challenging to translate into theme park attractions than many of the old "bad guy evil" stories (Peter Pan, Snow White, Alice, etc.). This (in my opinion) is why some of the film-based rides (FEA, Rat) haven't been as well-regarded by enthusiasts (FoP notwithstanding) unless they go the retelling-of-the-film route; they assume familiarity with the films and can't rely as much on the tropes to fill in the gaps of the storytelling.

Funnily enough I was going to point out Alice in Wonderland as an old Disney film that doesn't have a traditional love interest or villain! I suppose the Red Queen is "bad guy evil" to the extent of what we know about her, but she's irrelevant to most of what happens in the movie, only really appearing as an important character near the end. I think there are more examples of Disney animated films with no love interest than with no villain, though.

I also think Frozen does have a relatively traditional love interest/story and villain. Even though Hans is a "twist" villain, there's not much redeemable about what he does.

And I think the MCU as a whole is nearly as cliché as Top Gun/Avatar, with maybe a handful of exceptions.

Regardless, yeah, I think your original comment about love interests/villains was more nuanced than it sounded in your original post. It sounded like you were saying love interests and villains would no longer exist at all in stories in any form, when what you actually meant (at least from what I gather) is that they were evolving into something different from the traditional Disney animated versions. I agree with that, although I think there is still room for the traditional stories (and they're certainly not going anywhere... Disney has been making a killing releasing them in live action form), and yes, I think that evolution has always occurred rather than being something fundamentally new right now.

 

[BrianLo]

I'm all for another more classical, somewhat formulaic princess movie. I also get how some of the more recent fare can be a bit on the nose.

But Encanto is entirely extraneous to this argument. It is not a princess film, a love interest really doesn't make sense. No more than wondering why there is a lack of love interest in Big Hero Six. I think people see Disney + musical and put it into a box, but it needs a love interest for the lead no more than Coco did.

The villain thing is interesting, but I think specific to this movie would have really made for a worse film. It would be way too overstuffed and miss the point of historical family trauma to also layer on an outside force at play. I guess you could draw parallels against Coco though, but the story they told would have had to sideline the family members to also fit in a true 'villain'. Probably would have to lose the entire Bruno sub-plot to make a villain make sense. For obvious lucky reasons Bruno was not a bad choice they made.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

I don't think so. It's supposed to be teaming with life, hence the constant nature sounds, drums, exo-suit, rushing waterfalls, etc

A few simple AA type animals and even a Na'vi or two outside of the attractions would go a long way. Pandora feels empty without them unless you go on one of the rides.Think Rivers of America at DL.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Was it the most streamed movie of any kind across all platforms last year according to Nielsen, doing more than double the minutes of any other movie? Yes.

So nothing else matters. Sorry. It’s a hit.

Not to mention the Encanto album was number one on Billboard for over a month, and Bruno was #1 for weeks and weeks. And most of the other songs were in the top 100 for months.

Not to mention that Encanto's Tomatometer was 91%, and it's critics' score was 75, and audience score was 72, and its CinemasScore as "A." All very good.

Not to mention another $11M in home video sales.

And however much an album and individually streaming songs make from an album that went platinum in the U.S.

So, looking just at its theatrical take and nothing else is an egregious example of cherry-picking data on the behest of confirmation bias.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Inside Out was one of the worst movies ever made. Riley didn't triumph over the movie's villain and she never got the guy.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Inside Out was one of the worst movies ever made. Riley didn't triumph over the movie's villain and she never got the guy.

They will rectify that in Inside Out 2!

 

[celluloid]

My point is that filmmakers have always subverted tropes, though. It's not really something new.

Beyond that, I don't think that's some driving force for the majority of filmmakers today anyways. Avatar 2 is a massive hit just like the first film, and I don't see an argument that either of them does anything new/different from a storytelling/trope perspective.

While people point at Last Jedi as subverting tropes (although I've never really understood that argument because it didn't feel like it did anything new to me), it was also less successful than Force Awakens, which was about as paint by numbers as a film can be.

Top Gun: Maverick was the biggest film of last year and there's certainly not much new happening there.

Stranger Things is one of the biggest hits of the streaming era and it's a pastiche of 1980s films.

The MCU films also don't do much that's new/different; while they are fun films, they're generally very simple, standard stories (and are often drawing from comics written decades earlier).

That's not to suggest things aren't updated through the years as attitudes change (e.g., some of the very homophobic content in older films that wouldn't make it into a movie today), but I wouldn't classify that as something fundamentally different about modern storytelling. That's always happened too.

Great points. Avatar is the perfect example. It is Dances with Wolves in Space. And Dances with Wolves is from older stories of hero falling in love with enemy. Avatar did it well. Saying Avatar is the same story in Space would only be bad if it was not done well.
MAYA in design applies to all of these.

Most Advanced, Yet Accessible.

 

[celluloid]

Inside Out was one of the worst movies ever made. Riley didn't triumph over the movie's villain and she never got the guy.

Inside Out is a classic story of coming of age story through abstract of thought of what the human body does for us. MAYA applies there too. It was done well so it is not a seen by many as a trope. It is an old tale though. To make sense of abstract through animation is what Animation has done best since the start. That's a big ole trope, but done well!

 

[ToTBellHop]

Not to mention the Encanto album was number one on Billboard for over a month, and Bruno was #1 for weeks and weeks. And most of the other songs were in the top 100 for months.

Not to mention that Encanto's Tomatometer was 91%, and it's critics' score was 75, and audience score was 72, and its CinemasScore as "A." All very good.

Not to mention another $11M in home video sales.

And however much an album and individually streaming songs make from an album that went platinum in the U.S.

So, looking just at its theatrical take and nothing else is an egregious example of cherry-picking data on the behest of confirmation bias.

I thought we were very clear on this, you fool, but

 

[doctornick]

The MCU films also don't do much that's new/different; while they are fun films, they're generally very simple, standard stories (and are often drawing from comics written decades earlier).

As I was reading this back and forth, the immediate thing that jumped to mind was how the MCU - the most successful modern film franchise - is the epitome of using very old and worn tropes so successfully. There's very little in trying to subvert anything, it's just straightforward good versus evil and I think that the simplicity is one of the greatest strengths. In my experience, many people crave that simple escapism in their entertainment. There certainly is a place for more "sophisticated" storytelling in some films and there are different audiences with different desires, but I think largely the most broad appealing stuff is often going to rely on tried and true tropes because of how universal those concepts are but manages to tell those stories in a quality manner.