News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
That makes sense. I guess I personally just don't see Mario as an overwhelming kid IP in that way -- there are absolutely kids who love it, and it's certainly a bigger draw than Suess or anything else Universal has, but I don't think it's a massive kid draw the way Disney film IPs are for Disney.

I think the overall Mario audience skews older than 10; Pokemon might be a bigger draw for the under 10 crowd than Mario among Nintendo IPs (not that Pokemon doesn't also have a ton of older fans).

From my experience having nieces and nephews in that age frame, Minecraft is also far bigger than Mario for kids. Like not even comparable. I don't think Minecraft would really work well as a theme park land (or even attraction), though.
Minecraft, Roblox and random YouTubers are probably at the top of the “cool” list for boys from around 7 - 12. That said, I think a proposed trip to Nintendo World is the kind of thing that would cause this age group to jump up and down and shout “So awesome!” in a way that I don’t think Disney, with the more fairy tale focus, would. I don’t think Disney has the same “cool” factor there.

That said, that’s still a relatively small demographic, so I don’t know that their enthusiasm will make or break anything.
 

mightynine

Well-Known Member
I don't know that it will draw customers to the parks the way HP does. It'll be a draw for sure, but I just don't see the evidence to suggest more people will go to Universal specifically for the Mario land than went (and still go) specifically for HP.
I can tell you HP has zero interest for me, but I'll definitely make a trip to Universal for Super Nintendo World. So how many are out there like me?
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
So I’m a bigot if I don’t want to see a movie with a gay lead character?

I don’t know if that’s what you’re saying here, but Im a little slow.



🤷‍♂️
It depends on whether having a gay lead character is a factor for why you refuse to watch it. I don't have any desire to watch it because it has received far more mediocre to negative feedback than positive even from many progressive communities. The underlying movie is seemingly not particularly good, regardless of the gay character.

If you refuse to watch it BECAUSE there is a gay lead character in it (even if the movie was actually good), then yeah that would indeed make you a bigot.
 
Last edited:

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
I wish more would. I was really impressed with the anniversary show Phantom recorded in London, and I own the blu ray to that so I can watch one of my favorite shows anytime I want.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
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.
Of course Disney knows this
 

SirLink

Well-Known Member
It depends on whether having a gay lead character is a factor for why you refuse to watch it. I don't have any desire to watch it because it has received more mediocre to negative feedback even from many progressive communities. The underlying movie is seemingly not great, regardless of the gay character.

If you refuse to watch it BECAUSE there is a gay lead character in it (even if the movie was actually good), then yeah that would indeed make you a bigot.

But it is strange to think about the movies which 'advertised' gay characters have massively under performed ... Eternals/Lightyear/Strange Worlds I think it should be obvious that Iger needs to tell the creatives that they have to start thinking about business side and their experiment has failed so time to go back to the status quo. Also for the love of all things common sense get rid of the arbitary 45 days before films hit Disney+, make films have long cinema run, digital buy, digital rent, blu ray, DVD then streaming to get some value and to make some money.
 

MrPromey

Well-Known Member
You’d be about the only one there not…

It’s actually quite impressive/amazing…and lead directly to Disney building its upsell boutique stores in Flubtoo

I'm there in shorts and a thin t-shirt sweating my Shrek sidekick off in the middle of July and these kids and adults are running around in button down shirts with ties and BLACK polyester robes like it's the UK in spring.

I feel like I must be missing something - hidden ice packs, a complex petler cooling system built into the costumes - something.

That kind of behavior - which shows no signs of stopping - by people of all ages should scare the he!! out of Disney but it doesn't seem to.

I mean, there is Disneybouding, I suppose, but that usually consists of women in light color-matched dresses and you can go a whole day and not even run into someone doing that at WDW - nothing that shows actual insanity and/or a weird latent box kink the way what these guests at Universal put themselves through.
 
Last edited:

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
But it is strange to think about the movies which 'advertised' gay characters have massively under performed ... Eternals/Lightyear/Strange Worlds I think it should be obvious that Iger needs to tell the creatives that they have to start thinking about business side and their experiment has failed so time to go back to the status quo. Also for the love of all things common sense get rid of the arbitary 45 days before films hit Disney+, make films have long cinema run, digital buy, digital rent, blu ray, DVD then streaming to get some value and to make some money.
And you think those three movies underperformed because of the existence of gay people in them? Lightyear, Eternals and Strange World flopped because they are considered to be bad movies. Take every scene with reference to gay relationships out (which would barely have any effect on runtime), and they're still bad. Strange World flopped even worse because it had no prior attachment to a popular IP and anemic advertisement.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
It seems all but painfully clear at this point that there no money in that.

When the smoke clears from this chapek stuff…the foundation of the “problem” here is that investors don’t believe that D+ is a gamechanger. We have to read between the lines.
“…the foundation of the “problem” here is that investors don’t believe that Napster is a gamechanger. We have to read between the lines.”
—Recording Industry Executives, 1999
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I'm there in shorts and a thin t-shirt sweating my Shrek sidekick off in the middle of July and these kids and adults are running around in button down shirts with ties and BLACK polyester robes like it's the UK in spring.

I feel like I must be missing something - hidden ice packs, a complex petler cooling system built into the costumes - something.

That kind of behavior - which shows no signs of stopping - by people of all ages should scare the he!! out of Disney but it doesn't seem to.

I mean, there is Disneybouding, I suppose, but that usually consists of women in light color-matched dresses - nothing that shows actual insanity and/or a weird latent box kink the way what these guests at Universal put themselves through.
Oh I’m right with you on how impractical it is.

But it is truly amazing…I actually wanted my daughter to get one when she was 10 (it was in January so not hot) and she wasn’t really down with it. The Ravenclaw was so classy….

And Disney absolutely took notice and I can guarantee still harp on it. They just won’t admit it.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
But it is strange to think about the movies which 'advertised' gay characters have massively under performed ... Eternals/Lightyear/Strange Worlds I think it should be obvious that Iger needs to tell the creatives that they have to start thinking about business side and their experiment has failed so time to go back to the status quo. Also for the love of all things common sense get rid of the arbitary 45 days before films hit Disney+, make films have long cinema run, digital buy, digital rent, blu ray, DVD then streaming to get some value and to make some money.
How did any of these movies "advertise" gay characters?
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
And you think those three movies underperformed because of the existence of gay people in them? Lightyear, Eternals and Strange World flopped because they are considered to be bad movies. Take every scene with reference to gay relationships out (which would barely have any effect on runtime), and they're still bad. Strange World flopped even worse because it had no prior attachment to a popular IP and anemic advertisement.
Yes. Bad movies.

And what’s scary is this new “revisionist” movement by fans (who can’t complain about masks anymore…in many cases) to blame the characteristics of the characters as opposed to blaming Disney for making more crap.

That’s the problem and it’s hurting all divisions. It’s what Iger needs to have put in a sharp point and delicately placed on his chair at 6 am every morning
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
I can tell you HP has zero interest for me, but I'll definitely make a trip to Universal for Super Nintendo World. So how many are out there like me?

I'm sure there are plenty -- but the point is that statistics suggest HP has a larger customer base overall than Mario, so it's likely there are more people who would go solely for HP than solely for Mario.

But again, that's not suggesting Super Nintendo World won't be a success; just that measuring it against HP probably isn't a good idea.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom