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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Exactly. And, on a much more legitimate note, the star had huge amounts of baggage that turned off audiences.

External forces have a HUGE impact on box office. The hate network is ONE (again, rarely the dominant) external factor.

That was far more legitimate than Brie Larson hate…I will fully concede that one.

 

[Disney Irish]

That was far more legitimate than Brie Larson hate…I will fully concede that one.

Something we agree on.

 

[TP2000]

At risk of language policing, you shouldn't use she or sister to describe this character. There's a reason they're introduced as "sib" in the dialogue. Part of being NB is the removal of gender from the discussion.

That kind of thing and constantly shifting language just makes my head hurt.

Wade's line is "That's my little sib Lake and her girlfriend Gibley". If the sibling is not a "her" and Wade was being bigoted by calling her a her, than what is she? And why aren't they just Lesbians? Two female girlfriends are Lesbians in my lifetime of experience and decades of close friendships with women who love other women.

In this 3 second appearance, it's established that Lake is "non-binary" instead of a Lesbian? How? When?

 

[Ghost93]

At risk of language policing, you shouldn't use she or sister to describe this character. There's a reason they're introduced as "sib" in the dialogue. Part of being NB is the removal of gender from the discussion.

Wade says "her girlfriend" which usually refers to a female gender. This goes back to my point that you would have no idea the character was nonbinary if not said so by an actor in the real world.

 

[brideck]

That kind of thing and constantly shifting language just makes my head hurt.

Wade's line is "That's my little sib Lake and her girlfriend Gibley". If the sibling is not a "her" and Wade was being bigoted by calling her a her, than what is she? And why aren't they just Lesbians? Two female girlfriends are Lesbians in my lifetime of experience and decades of close friendships.

Language has always shifted, and not just in this space. It might be time you get used to that phenomenon.

And, sorry, I missed that. Pronouns and titles are always a personal choice, so it looks like for Lake the creators were going with she/her and the title of sib (instead of sis). As an example, my spouse is they/them and sib.

 

[TP2000]

Wade says "her girlfriend" which usually refers to a female gender. This goes back to my point that you would have no idea the character was nonbinary if not said so by an actor in the real world.

Once again, thank you.

I'm honestly trying to keep up here, but it's not easy. Two women who are romantically involved are no longer Lesbians? They're now non-binary?

And the theater audience is supposed to get all that from a single 3 second appearance? How? When? And who cares?

If a rather savvy older gay guy like me who has had Lesbian friends for decades doesn't get the "non-binary" character, then how the heck is the straight audience in a Columbus, Ohio theater going to get it? And why is it even there?

 

[brideck]

Wade says "her girlfriend" which usually refers to a female gender. This goes back to my point that you would have no idea the character was nonbinary if not said so by an actor in the real world.

Yep. Mea culpa. And agreed that this amounts to about the least obvious possible presentation of a non-binary character.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Well, eventually, somebody has to make the risky move to make progress happen. Even if it isn't financially rewarding in the short term, it helps pave way for future representation.

I will somewhat agree, however, the way Disney has gone about LGBT inclusion has been clumsy from a business standpoint. I still maintain Disney should have made one GREAT movie with a gay romance/relationship as the focus and then have had several movies in a row with no gay characters rather than try to shoehorn a bunch of insignificant gay supporting characters into almost every film. Gay or lesbian people may appreciate seeing a minor gay supporting character, but they won't show up in droves to support a film with relatively minor representation. Yet people who have an issue with gay characters WILL boycott a movie with gay representation, even if it's small. Which is why if Disney was to endure all the controversy for LGBT representation, they should have just gone all out and made something more substantial.

I certainly support Disney making a big film focused on an LGBTQ character… but Disney is cowardly, like most corporation, and the widely broadcast outrage over the background figures has done its work and thoroughly cowed the execs (who are already terrified of reactions in overseas markets).

But let’s not fool ourselves, if Disney did make such a film in the present environment, the firestorm would dwarf what we saw in 2023. Major figures would excoriate the company non-stop on Sunday shows and in speeches. It would impact the box office for unrelated Disney films for an indeterminate period. And many of the usual suspects here, regardless of what they say now, would criticize Disney for causing it all.

 

[Ghost93]

Yep. Mea culpa. And agreed that this amounts to about the least obvious possible presentation of a non-binary character.

Did you and your spouse see Nimona by any chance? That was an animated movie (that was ORIGINALLY going to be released by Disney before they dropped it) that I feel has far better LGBTQ representation than anything the Walt Disney Company has put out.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I originally thought the hate network posts were about YouTube sites like Nerdrotic but now I have no idea either, those sites combined reach a few million people at most, not the billions that it would take to doom a movie worldwide, even throwing in mainstream right sites like FoxNews wouldn’t have a fraction of the reach needed to influence the entire world.

I think we’re in tinfoil hat territory to think there’s an underlying “network” that can influence billions of people globally.

A network isn’t necessary; just a touchpoint will do. To wit: Bud Lite.

 

[brideck]

Did you and your spouse see Nimona by any chance? That was an animated movie (that was ORIGINALLY going to be released by Disney before they dropped it) that I feel has far better LGBTQ representation than anything the Walt Disney Company has put out.

We did and absolutely loved it. As you might imagine, they felt pretty seen by that one. And yeah... I can only imagine what would've happened if Disney had released it.

 

[Ghost93]

I certainly support Disney making a big film focused on an LGBTQ character… but Disney is cowardly, like most corporation, and the widely broadcast outrage over the background figures has done its work and thoroughly cowed the execs (who are already terrified of reactions in overseas markets).

But let’s not fool ourselves, if Disney did make such a film in the present environment, the firestorm would dwarf what we saw in 2023. Major figures would excoriate the company non-stop on Sunday shows and in speeches. It would impact the box office for unrelated Disney films for an indeterminate period. And many of the usual suspects here, regardless of what they say now, would criticize Disney for causing it all.

When do you think Disney would get to the point where they could release such a film without it significantly hurting the box office? I personally think sometime in the mid-2030s, unless the U.S. has a major rollback of LGBTQ rights in the next decade (you never can take progress as a given unfortunately).

 

[brideck]

One movie that Disney did actually release (albeit under the Searchlight banner) was Taika Waititi's Next Goal Wins. It pretty prominently featured a traditional Samoan fa'afafine (third gender) character, and I have no idea what kind of blowback that one got. Obviously, Disney didn't push that movie particularly hard here in the U.S.

And that portrayal is a little less risky because it can be othered as foreign, even though American Samoa is technically part of the country. Sort of. It's complicated.

 

[Casper Gutman]

When do you think Disney would get to the point where they could release such a film without it significantly hurting the box office? I personally think sometime in the mid-2030s, unless the U.S. has a major rollback of LGBTQ rights in the next decade (you never can take progress as a given unfortunately).

I suspect at some point another studio will theatrically release a LGBTQ-focused film that becomes a surprise hit and Disney will jump on the band wagon. I fear the company is too timid and too much the focus of attention to initiate the process. I believe we talked about the fact that it was a very good thing Disney didn’t release Nimona.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I very strongly suspect you are very, very willing to acknowledge the existence of a loose, informal network of ideologically likeminded outlets - mainstream media, YouTube, bloggers, etc - attempting to influence public opinion if we start talking about MSNBC, the New York Times, BBC etc.

I would, but if you told me MSNBC and other likeminded outlets were influencing billions of people worldwide to avoid a certain movie I’d still say you were wearing a tinfoil hat.

The further left or right the ideology is the less reach it has. Fox primarily appeals to the far right, to people that already think like they do, MSNBC primarily appeals to the far left, to people that already feel like they do. The vast majority don’t watch either, the moderates find them both insane.

FoxNews reaches a couple million people in Primetime, MSNBC reaches about 1 million in Primetime, neither has the weight to influence anything beyond the extremes.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Agreed. One other thing that impacted Strange World flopping was that it was outright banned in Communist China, much of Africa, all of the Mid East Muslim countries, etc. for having a leading gay character in it. Disney had to know that beforehand.

The following nation's government censors forbid Strange World from being publicly shown to their citizens:

• All countries in the Middle East, except Israel
• Africa; Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Nigeria, Ghana
• Communist China, Vietnam
• And majority Muslim nations; Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Pakistan, Maldives, Bangladesh

Darn those youtubers for influencing those governments!!! We all know the leaders of Pakistan and Malaysia sit down each night and turn on Critical Drinker.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

A network isn’t necessary; just a touchpoint will do. To wit: Bud Lite.

I mean…if we’re gonna use the most extreme examples of stupidity…it dilutes the effectiveness of the argument.

Besides…anyone who drinks Bud lite has suffered enough…let’s give them a pass

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I would, but if you told me MSNBC and other likeminded outlets were influencing billions of people worldwide to avoid a certain movie I’d still say you were wearing a tinfoil hat.

The further left or right the ideology is the less reach it has. Fox primarily appeals to the far right, to people that already think like they do, MSNBC primarily appeals to the far left, to people that already feel like they do. The vast majority don’t watch either, the moderates find them both insane.

FoxNews reaches a couple million people in Primetime, MSNBC reaches about 1 million in Primetime, neither has the weight to influence anything beyond the extremes.

Also those audiences are 1000% baked into doctrine before they even turn it on…no “open minded” opinions are movies will be had there. They’re drones from the hive

 

[brideck]

Darn those youtubers for influencing those governments!!! We all know the leaders of Pakistan and Malaysia sit down each night and turn on Critical Drinker.

I mean, they don't have to? Homosexuality is just straight up illegal in the vast majority of those countries.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I would, but if you told me MSNBC and other likeminded outlets were influencing billions of people worldwide to avoid a certain movie I’d still say you were wearing a tinfoil hat.

The further left or right the ideology is the less reach it has. Fox primarily appeals to the far right, to people that already think like they do, MSNBC primarily appeals to the far left, to people that already feel like they do. The vast majority don’t watch either, the moderates find them both insane.

FoxNews reaches a couple million people in Primetime, MSNBC reaches about 1 million in Primetime, neither has the weight to influence anything beyond the extremes.

Who is talking about billions?

Those networks have significant impact, and Fox in particular then gets dramatically amplified by Facebook and Twitter and other social media outlets along with YouTube and the like. The issue enters the zeitgeist and reaches more people. I mean, how do you think people heard Inside Out 2 was coming out? If a network of outlets can announce and promote a film, they can damage it too.

As a side note, MSNBC is not “far left” and (sadly) Fox is not “far right.” Both are in the mainstream of the US spectrum, not on the fringes.