Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[BuddyThomas]

If you are talking about the Little Mermaid it was a corporate marketing gimmick to cast Halle Bailey as Ariel.
For 38 years kid grew up with original animated Disney version of “The Little Mermaid”. For those who grew up with this image, any significant change can feel jarring or inauthentic to their memories of the character.
There’s a view that corporations, including film studios, make such casting decisions more for public relations or to appear progressive, rather than for artistic reasons. This can lead to skepticism about the authenticity of such choices.

Everyone loves Paterson Joseph playing Slugworth or Calah Lane playing Noodle.
It felt natural and real. The story felt new and interesting.
No one had ever seen slugworth.
It not like Noodle was a well known animated character children grew up with for 40 years and then as a marketing gimmick change her.

Disney needed to create an original story with
Halle Bailey with an original score from lin manuel miranda… because they are Disney and that’s what they are supposed to do.

Not remaking all time Disney classics worse than they were before. I’m including the remake of Beauty and the Beast in that. Sorry.. Emma Watson wasn’t good because she couldn’t live up to the animated version of Belle.
Princess Tiana was a great character and a great animated film (Yes I’m upset they didn’t create a new E-ticket ride for her and instead killed an all time classic… different argument)

All I see with the New Little Mermaid is New Coke vs Classic Coke. We all know how that failed in the 80s.

So I don’t understand how someone can like Dave Chapelle, Eddie Murphy, Denzel Washington, Fox, Jackson, Gloover, Freeman.. Love Wonka, Love Princess and the Frog… go on and on and on but if they disliked the character casting of Mermaid because it felt fake and forced (and it did) they are…

How did you put it?

“Think they're going to keep people "in their place?"

“There's a new majority in town. And it's minorities. I hope they treat us (white people) better than so many of us treated them. (And that's probably what the former majority is afraid of.)”.

Good lord. If anyone feels “jarred” by the casting in the new movie, they need to look within and examine a few things.

 

[DKampy]

Disney has committed to increasing the representation of LGBTQ and transgender characters in its future projects. Karey Burke, the President of Disney General Entertainment, stated that the company aims to portray at least 50% of their future characters as either LGBTQanother form of underrepresented minority. This commitment is part of Disney’s broader effort to enhance diversity and inclusivity in its content. The company has also faced some backlash from the LGBTQcommunity in the past, but they are now taking more significant strides towards diversity, with plans to

During Disney’s D23 Expo, a range of upcoming projects was announced from various Disney franchises, including Marvel, Star Wars, Lucasfilm, Disney+, Pixar, and Disney Animation. While specific details about the inclusion of LGBTQ and transgender characters in these projects weren’t explicitly mentioned in the source, the overall direction of Disney’s content strategy suggests a continued and growing focus on


• For details on Disney’s plans to portray at least 50% of their future characters as either LGBTQ or another form of underrepresented minority, you can visit ScreenGeek.

What is so evil about this? You do realized if you included all of the underrepresented groups in the population of this world… white straight males would be ithe minority

 

[CinematicFusion]

Good lord. If anyone feels “jarred” by the casting in the new movie, they need to look within and examine a few things.

Well, perhaps if we spent as much time examining the reasons behind corporate decisions as we do telling others to ‘look within,’ we might get a clearer picture of what’s really driving these changes in our beloved childhood stories.

 

[Jedijax719]

I'm pretty sure that Disney is finished with changing demographics of animated characters. Halle Bailey was a great choice, but I would say that Disney doesn't want to deal with the @#$% anymore. So, they are indeed going forward with new stories that have a great deal of diversity and that would be very welcome. However, one of the first big projects/franchises they are going to do that with is SW. It's a nice venture, but that's a franchise that is already got a LOT of burden to deal with from within its own obsessive, sometimes neurotic, and very often extremely negative fanbase.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

If you are talking about the Little Mermaid it was a corporate marketing gimmick to cast Halle Bailey as Ariel.
For 38 years kid grew up with original animated Disney version of “The Little Mermaid”. For those who grew up with this image, any significant change can feel jarring or inauthentic to their memories of the character.
There’s a view that corporations, including film studios, make such casting decisions more for public relations or to appear progressive, rather than for artistic reasons. This can lead to skepticism about the authenticity of such choices.

Everyone loves Paterson Joseph playing Slugworth or Calah Lane playing Noodle.
It felt natural and real. The story felt new and interesting.
No one had ever seen slugworth.
It not like Noodle was a well known animated character children grew up with for 40 years and then as a marketing gimmick change her.

Disney needed to create an original story with
Halle Bailey with an original score from lin manuel miranda… because they are Disney and that’s what they are supposed to do.

Not remaking all time Disney classics worse than they were before. I’m including the remake of Beauty and the Beast in that. Sorry.. Emma Watson wasn’t good because she couldn’t live up to the animated version of Belle.
Princess Tiana was a great character and a great animated film (Yes I’m upset they didn’t create a new E-ticket ride for her and instead killed an all time classic… different argument)

All I see with the New Little Mermaid is New Coke vs Classic Coke. We all know how that failed in the 80s.

So I don’t understand how someone can like Dave Chapelle, Eddie Murphy, Denzel Washington, Fox, Jackson, Gloover, Freeman.. Love Wonka, Love Princess and the Frog… go on and on and on but if they disliked the character casting of Mermaid because it felt fake and forced (and it did) they are…

How did you put it?

“Think they're going to keep people "in their place?"

“There's a new majority in town. And it's minorities. I hope they treat us (white people) better than so many of us treated them. (And that's probably what the former majority is afraid of.)”.

Yeah, when I said, “I see you,” I didn’t need you to confirm it with that screed. Hope you don’t think you acquitted yourself.

No need to respond. I wouldn’t associate with you in real life. Why do it here?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

No, it's generalizing so I don't have to list every single type of person. But that's the gist of the list. Coloring outside those lines is what makes people think there is an "agenda." So we can throw around the word agenda but not define it or respond to incorrect assertions about it?

The primary focus of the world in the last 100 years of Disney has been, in fact, straight white christians, notable exceptions in the very, very recent past only. Prove me wrong.

Which made sense since Disney was making movies for an American audience (pre globalisation) and 90% of the country was straight white Christian’s until fairly recently, even as recently as 1980 both were over 80%, both over 70% in 2010, both still over 60% today. That’s not an agenda, it’s knowing your audience.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Which made sense since Disney was making movies for an American audience (pre globalisation) and 90% of the country was straight white Christian’s until fairly recently, even as recently as 1980 both were over 80%, both over 70% in 2010, both still over 60% today. That’s not an agenda, it’s knowing your audience.

For the most part, I agree. (Notable exception that the others were underrepresented to varying degrees in the last 50 years.)

Likewise, it makes as much sense to represent/reflect the others now.

 

[celluloid]

Disney's one decent original film this year had success in a story and parable of tolerance. Maybe, just maybe, how well the stories are made is what matters to a brand based on storytelling entertainment?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

For the most part, I agree. (Notable exception that the others were underrepresented to varying degrees in the last 50 years.)

Likewise, it makes as much sense to represent/reflect the others now.

To a certain extent it does, it just feels like Disney went from one extreme to the other, they went from over-representing straight white men to reducing straight white men to predominantly sidekicks and comic relief roles, or simply erasing them, the result is they‘re alienating part of their audience in their effort to expand it.

 

[TP2000]

What a hum dinger of a year for Burbank, Huh?

Did we get to a BILLION in loses, @TP2000 ?

Yes. Disney lost $1.248 Billion in 2023, by the math from my damp cocktail napkin.

That figure includes tax subsidies that Disney scooped up in '23, but it doesn't include future DVD sales from stores that no longer sell DVD's in '24 and '25. The sales of discounted Wish pajama sets from Target are a bit harder to pin down.

 

[TP2000]

…good god…same stupid excuses 10 months and 10 movies deep.

It was a disaster. Period. The whole year.

Where’s that gin I hid around here somewhere?

It's in your icebox, Crystal, behind the cobwebs.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

To a certain extent it does, it just feels like Disney went from one extreme to the other, they went from over-representing straight white men to reducing straight white men to predominantly sidekicks and comic relief roles, or simply erasing them, the result is they‘re alienating part of their audience in their effort to expand it.

I think all of entertainment did that, starting in the late 80s/early 90s when sitcom Dads became idiots and stayed that way.

If you’re in a minority, nothing feels like one extreme to the other. It feels like waiting a lifetime for crumbs - and then other people want to ruin it for us.

It’s not reasonable for those previously on a pedestal to feel slighted by that.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

I'm fascinated that so many of you still buy/watch physical disks! It's honestly been 15 years since I used a DVD. I have questions:

• How do you guys watch DVDs on your iPads?
• Do you also subscribe to D+ and other streaming services?
• Do you need to polish/buff scratches out of the disks?
• Do you carry them in a big folio case like we used to?
• Do you have a DVD player for each TV in your home?

Obviously the announcement that Best Buy is going to stop carrying DVDs is a result of audience behavior, but I truly had no idea that some of us were still DVD devotees.

Physical media still provides better quality than streaming.

Audio on 4K discs is better in particular if one has a good sound system.

Specialty labels like Criterion, Arrow, and Shout offer feature heavy discs that aren't available via streaming. Decent special features on mainstream releases have become much rarer over time.

 

[TP2000]

The last few pages (before deletions that is) is/was a better story than anything Disney released in 2023!

Oh, hell. Did I miss something? I was busy downloading names that had visited Epstein Island.

 

[BuddyThomas]

Well, perhaps if we spent as much time examining the reasons behind corporate decisions as we do telling others to ‘look within,’ we might get a clearer picture of what’s really driving these changes in our beloved childhood stories.

The original film still exists, the last time I checked.

 

[Willmark]

Oh, hell. Did I miss something? I was busy downloading names that had visited Epstein Island.

Nah says more about Disney’s movies in 2023 more than anything.

 

[CinematicFusion]

Yeah, when I said, “I see you,” I didn’t need you to confirm it with that screed. Hope you don’t think you acquitted yourself.

No need to respond. I wouldn’t associate with you in real life. Why do it here?

I appreciate your perspective and understand that casting decisions can be seen in many different lights. My critique is rooted in a concern for the authenticity and artistic direction of remakes, rather than the racial aspect of casting. It’s important to have diverse representation, and I fully support that. My point is about the broader context of how these decisions are made and perceived. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and I respect that we may see things differently on this matter.

 

[LittleBuford]

If you are talking about the Little Mermaid it was a corporate marketing gimmick to cast Halle Bailey as Ariel.
For 38 years kid grew up with original animated Disney version of “The Little Mermaid”. For those who grew up with this image, any significant change can feel jarring or inauthentic to their memories of the character.
There’s a view that corporations, including film studios, make such casting decisions more for public relations or to appear progressive, rather than for artistic reasons. This can lead to skepticism about the authenticity of such choices.

I don’t understand what you mean by “authenticity” here. Had Halle Bailey not been qualified for the role, I could see where you’re coming from, but pretty much everyone agrees she was excellent as Ariel.

 

[CinematicFusion]

I don’t understand what you mean by “authenticity” here. Had Halle Bailey not been qualified by the role, I could see where you’re coming from, but pretty much everyone agrees she was excellent as Ariel.

I appreciate your point, and I agree that Halle Bailey is a talented actress who brought her own unique qualities to the role of Ariel. My use of ‘authenticity’ refers more to how changes in iconic characters can sometimes feel jarring to those who have a deep connection with the original versions. It’s not about the actor’s qualifications or talent, but about how such significant changes in well-established characters can impact the audience’s connection to the story. I respect the different viewpoints on this and understand that such casting can be exciting and refreshing for many.

 

[LittleBuford]

I appreciate your point, and I agree that Halle Bailey is a talented actress who brought her own unique qualities to the role of Ariel. My use of ‘authenticity’ refers more to how changes in iconic characters can sometimes feel jarring to those who have a deep connection with the original versions. It’s not about the actor’s qualifications or talent, but about how such significant changes in well-established characters can impact the audience’s connection to the story. I respect the different viewpoints on this and understand that such casting can be exciting and refreshing for many.

Thank you for your civility.

As someone who grew up on, and still adores, the animated classics, I’ve never been that keen on the remakes as an idea, though I’ve tried to approach each one with an open mind. The original Little Mermaid is among my very favourite films, and so the remake had a particularly high bar to meet in order to pass muster with me. I came away more than pleased with the result, which both paid tribute to and departed in interesting ways from the original. Halle Bailey made a worthy success to Jodi Benson, and the moment of interaction between them in the market scene spoke to this continuity in a very heartwarming way. Will the live-action version ever equal the animated one in my estimation? No, it won’t. But both films are there for me to watch and enjoy whenever I wish. The two can happily coexist in my view.