News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

[sedati]

Very true!!!. Many parents aren’t taking their kids to Disney movies anymore. I think most people know why that is.

They were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century and don’t seem to realize that we’re well into another century of further progress.

 

[LittleBuford]

"Single millennial women with a college degree in major downtown metropolitan centers" is an extraordinarily narrow target demographic, particularly for a genre that skews heavily towards boys and adult men.

You just told us that you really enjoyed Ms. Marvel, even though you’re not a Muslim girl of South Asian heritage. One doesn’t have to directly identify with the protagonist in order to feel a rapport with them or the show.

 

[MrPromey]

This is 1000% true.

I believe their new park is a gamechanger…and i’m a tad of a “skeptic”…
But I really think it’s gonna cut into wdw…and I bet Iger knows it. The 3 years wasted of no projects starting was stupid.

When IOA opened…there was a lot of buzz around town that it was a “gamechanger”…and it was…for sea world. Disney’s lead was to great to penetrate at that time. It was a gnat on an elephant.

But the dynamics are different now.

Universal has seriously upped their standards since then while Disney has lowered theirs and we now find they've sort of converged in the middle.

Based on what we know, combined with a lot that's rumored and the fact that they haven't slowed down in the other two parks at all reminds me a lot of that old story about the the hare and the tortoise.

The second trailer for the Mario Movie just dropped and I can't tell you how many adults I know who are excited for this - both with and without children and it's of course, an Illumination/Universal release.

The quality of the animation is way beyond their normal work - like Disney/Pixar territory.

And of course, we know one thing that's confirmed for Epic, don't we?

Disney really needs to get their act together because they're losing their grip on multiple fronts.

Someone else seems to have their own synergy machine and it apparently knows how to do more than sling themed cupcakes and open IP based roller coasters themed around what appears to be a dead franchise.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

You just told us that you really enjoyed Ms. Marvel, even though you’re not a Muslim girl of South Asian heritage. One doesn’t have to directly identify with the protagonist in order to feel a rapport with them or the show.

Kamala Khan didn't preach Islam. Jen Walters did preach fourth-wave feminism.

 

[dreday3]

Kamala Khan didn't preach Islam. Jen Walters did preach fourth-wave feminism.

When you're a woman who has had to ignore all the lewd/inappropriate things (some) men have said to her all her life, embarrassing her in front of strangers, demeaning her in the workplace, made you actually walk down different streets to avoid certain situations...come talk to us about what is "preaching".

I don't know if the show worked or not, never watched it. But you are getting really close to acting as if none of what you're talking about actually happens...must just be women acting hysterical. I'm the last one who will preach, but I certainly don't dismiss.

 

[MrPromey]

I'm honestly surprised Netflix hasn't dropped a couple billion dollars in Southwest Texas for their own theme park and entertainment complex. They have enough interesting IP and could license other things not yet sucked up by the other parks. It wouldn't make sense for Disney or Universal to compete further with themselves, but another player could mix things up and that would diversify the revenue stream over there.

Chapek seemed so focused on just making as much money as he can right now to ride out the bad times, but not investing in the future of the parks more is dangerous. Leaves you looking more like the Chevrolet of theme parks than the Cadillac. Reputations are hard to retrieve once lost.

Is southwest Texas much of a tourist destination, currently?

The big ones have tended to drop their resorts in places relatively close to where people were already going.

I don't know a lot about the tourist scene in that part of Texas.

Would this be Netflix planting their flag and competing with the likes of Disney/Universal/(kinda) Sea World or would it be more like their answer to a Six Flags?

 

[MrPromey]

Looking at a D+ subscription at $7.99/mo or $79/yr, I can buy a years worth of D+ for taking my family of 4 to the theater to see 1 movie a year. D+ cannibalizes theatrical releases. The only thing supporting theatrical release is FOMO.

That's not the only thing.

Crazy as it sounds, some people do actually like going to the movie theater.

I and my son are two of those people.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

When you're a woman who has had to ignore all the lewd/inappropriate things (some) men have said to her all her life, embarrassing her in front of strangers, demeaning her in the workplace, made you actually walk down different streets to avoid certain situations...come talk to us about what is "preaching".

The number of people who 1) relate to what you just said and 2) are comic book movie fans is extremely small. It doesn't diminish your experience, but it calls into question the decision making from a company whose job it is to sell content to the masses.

It's like if McDonald's decided to go 100% vegan. Some people are vegan, and that's great, and it's good to have options for them. But most people aren't vegan, and McDonald's can't survive unless they're able to sell billions of hamburgers a year. There aren't enough vegans to sustain their model.

 

[MrPromey]

The movie and the success of the rides/lands are completely separate. The existing rides in Tokyo are subpar, to put it mildly. At least one of those is coming here as a direct clone. The land itself, obviously, is immaculately themed. The DK coaster might be better than the Tokyo attractions, but it might not.

But yes, the movie will make a pile of money. I will see it day 1, but I have zero interest in SNW Orlando.

According to Universal Creative, it's not a direct clone, at least if you're talking about the karting one.

In speaking recently to someone at an event who was involved in the Japan park addition, they've made changes and improved some elements based on what they've learned from the operation of that one, for the one set to open in Hollywood.

Admittedly it was a vague statement and I don't think it's going to be a night-and-day difference but it doesn't sound like it's going to be a Ratatouille-like situation, either.

Either way, I'd argue that the movie and success of the rides/lands are not completely separate, at all.

The current Minions attraction at Universal Studios usually has one of the longest wait times of anything in the two parks (behind Hagrads but some days, the same as Velocicoaster) It's a lameish reskin of the Jimmy Neutron ride which itself was a reskin of Hanna Barbera.

It'd be nice if that attraction were better (and of course, something original that's related is going in across the path from it) but what's there hasn't been unpopular, at all.

The Mario land may not have an attraction on par with say, FOP but this is a case where the IP matters enough that it doesn't need to either because unlike FOP, people will move through the turnstiles for the IP, alone.

 

[flynnibus]

I don’t agree with you, but leaving that aside, this can’t be the sort of thing people dislike about, say, Strange World, which doesn’t feature any explicit commentary of this kind. That’s why I asked my question: What exactly about Disney’s recent animated movies can be construed as “preaching”? Is representation alone the supposed issue?

I'll dumb it down for you...

many people think many of several scenarios are less frequent, or are topics that are not things that normally should be center stage.. yet in many projects there are concerted efforts to BUCK that trend and make those things/scenarios much more visible.. that causes friction. When people make a change intentionally as part of an effort to raise awareness or try to champion something... that is where people start talking 'preaching' 'woke' etc. People perceive the changes as FORCED or intentional rather than simple evolution of acceptance.

Example: if you think a gay couple is something that is less common... yet in these films it seems they are everywhere... This will stand out to you..

If you think a character is supposed to be one race, and they cast another... this will stand out to you

If you gender swap characters for no apparent reason other then it appears to be making the gender more prevalent... this will stand out to you.

The friction comes from changes that are perceived as excessive or forced. When those changes are intentional and done for the reasoning of advancing something -- that's when people start talking about AGENDAS instead of the impact of the individual change itself.

The challenge is perception is in eye of the beholder. One person sees "oh this is just more representative of reality..." another person sees "this is different... for reasons other than story". One person sees "on these are things I can more relate to..." another person sees "why are you pushing these unfamiliar topics I don't care about...".

So what one person sees as more welcoming... another may see as more disruptive. "preaching" or whatever just boils down to the interpretation of WHY these changes are happening. And all of that is BEFORE you mix in the controversy of 'this something I want to be promoted or not...'.

All the reasons why people do try to champion these changes are exactly the same reasons why the changes cause responses in those who don't want their status quo disturbed.

 

[LittleBuford]

The number of people who 1) relate to what you just said and 2) are comic book movie fans is extremely small. It doesn't diminish your experience, but it calls into question the decision making from a company whose job it is to sell content to the masses.

It's like if McDonald's decided to go 100% vegan. Some people are vegan, and that's great, and it's good to have options for them. But most people aren't vegan, and McDonald's can't survive unless they're able to sell billions of hamburgers a year. There aren't enough vegans to sustain their model.

This is a very strange comparison given that 50% of people are women. And it’s not like those of us who aren’t women need to look far to find people in our lives who are.

 

[dreday3]

The number of people who 1) relate to what you just said and 2) are comic book movie fans is extremely small. It doesn't diminish your experience, but it calls into question the decision making from a company whose job it is to sell content to the masses.

It's like if McDonald's decided to go 100% vegan. Some people are vegan, and that's great, and it's good to have options for them. But most people aren't vegan, and McDonald's can't survive unless they're able to sell billions of hamburgers a year. There aren't enough vegans to sustain their model.

I understand what you are trying to say, but I think you may be underestimating the amount of women who:

1. Experience that kind of harassment
2. Are into comic book movies.



maybe the show just isn't good!

 

[JD80]

The number of people who 1) relate to what you just said and 2) are comic book movie fans is extremely small. It doesn't diminish your experience, but it calls into question the decision making from a company whose job it is to sell content to the masses.

It's like if McDonald's decided to go 100% vegan. Some people are vegan, and that's great, and it's good to have options for them. But most people aren't vegan, and McDonald's can't survive unless they're able to sell billions of hamburgers a year. There aren't enough vegans to sustain their model.

I mean She Hulk wasn't the only MCU product released this year.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The number of people who 1) relate to what you just said and 2) are comic book movie fans is extremely small. It doesn't diminish your experience, but it calls into question the decision making from a company whose job it is to sell content to the masses.

It's like if McDonald's decided to go 100% vegan. Some people are vegan, and that's great, and it's good to have options for them. But most people aren't vegan, and McDonald's can't survive unless they're able to sell billions of hamburgers a year. There aren't enough vegans to sustain their model.

I think the point is you can’t really be an expert on shoes you’ve never walked in

 

[montyz81]

Something like Lexus would have been a better analogy.

Premium, not boutique. Building a brand image that extols quality and delivering... building a reputation through results, not flash. They were never the pinnacle of a specific quality, but they were at a premium level and a total package well beyond their peers.

They focused on their vision, delivered, and let the results speak for themselves... and then trusted that the vision, not duplication, was the model for success.

Models like Royles, etc just focus on the extreme, the opulence, the separation. Disney and Toyota instead focus on execution of a premium belief.

OK. I agree with that. Lexus then.

 

[JD80]

I think the point is you can’t really be an expert on shoes you’ve never walked in

It's very close to mansplaining to women how women can't be a large portion of MCU fans and/or are not really harassed.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I think the point is you can’t really be an expert on shoes you’ve never walked in

I'm not pretending to be. But I can look at the sales data and see how many of which types of shoes were sold to whom.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I see the source of your confusion now. That guy (Robert Iger) is wearing a suit. The new guy (Bob Iger, Robert's cooler brother) wears a cardigan. The guy in the suit may have mishandled the growth of the parks, but the guy in the cardigan is different even though they bear a striking resemblance to each other.

Has it ever come up in these forums how much Bob Iger resembles the villain in Big Hero 6 (or was it 8)? If I weren't on my phone I'd post a picture.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm not pretending to be. But I can look at the sales data and see how many of which types of shoes were sold to whom.

Which leads to interpretation errors due to lack of context.

Like some say if you go from $2.1 billion…to $1.4 to $1.075 you’re doing “great!”…

I mean…that’s a lot of money, right??!!

…but in fact you’re collapsing.

 

[LittleBuford]

I'll dumb it down for you...

many people think many of several scenarios are less frequent, or are topics that are not things that normally should be center stage.. yet in many projects there are concerted efforts to BUCK that trend and make those things/scenarios much more visible.. that causes friction. When people make a change intentionally as part of an effort to raise awareness or try to champion something... that is where people start talking 'preaching' 'woke' etc. People perceive the changes as FORCED or intentional rather than simple evolution of acceptance.

Example: if you think a gay couple is something that is less common... yet in these films it seems they are everywhere... This will stand out to you..

If you think a character is supposed to be one race, and they cast another... this will stand out to you

If you gender swap characters for no apparent reason other then it appears to be making the gender more prevalent... this will stand out to you.

The friction comes from changes that are perceived as excessive or forced. When those changes are intentional and done for the reasoning of advancing something -- that's when people start talking about AGENDAS instead of the impact of the individual change itself.

The challenge is perception is in eye of the beholder. One person sees "oh this is just more representative of reality..." another person sees "this is different... for reasons other than story". One person sees "on these are things I can more relate to..." another person sees "why are you pushing these unfamiliar topics I don't care about...".

So what one person sees as more welcoming... another may see as more disruptive. "preaching" or whatever just boils down to the interpretation of WHY these changes are happening. And all of that is BEFORE you mix in the controversy of 'this something I want to be promoted or not...'.

All the reasons why people do try to champion these changes are exactly the same reasons why the changes cause responses in those who don't want their status quo disturbed.

I agree with much of this analysis.

What I most dislike about where this friction has got us is that people are much too quick to blame diversity for a film’s shortcomings. The idea that Buzzyear, for example, is a bad film because its creators focused too much on diversity makes zero sense when you stop to think about it. Are we really to believe that so much time was spent designing characters of colour and including a gay kiss that none was left to come up with a good story?