Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here! Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
That’s very easy for you to say. Me, I’ve been waiting for more than 40 years now, and my patience is growing thin. If it really is the case that droves of parents kept away from Strange World because it depicted a gay teen (my own view is that other factors were primarily responsible, but let’s go with @TP2000’s explanation, which you’ve repeatedly liked)—if that really is the case, then so be it. I’d sooner gain a bit of representation than have Disney appease a bunch of small-minded reactionaries by continuing to wait for some indeterminate time of “acceptance”. We’re deep into the twenty-first century—people have had long enough to work through their irrational prejudices.
In my opinion, the characters in Strange World are ALL fine. The gay teen was irreverent, nothing special, nothing new, nothing worth noting in my mind. Just my opinion.
The messaging that bothered me (probably only me) was the "save the planet, get rid of fossil fuels, live in the dark", to save the planet" message.
It goes to show you, different people come away with different views from movies.
In my opinion, the characters in Strange World are ALL fine. The gay teen was irreverent, nothing special, nothing new, nothing worth noting in my mind. Just my opinion.
The messaging that bothered me (probably only me) was the "save the planet, get rid of fossil fuels, live in the dark", to save the planet" message.
I goes to show you, different people come away with different views from movies.
Well, we’re talking about people who never saw the film to form an opinion about it in the first place—people who supposedly harbour such prejudice towards the gay community that they can’t bear the thought of their children knowing about its existence. But that’s OK, because the world is imperfect and we queers should remain patient for a few more centuries while our poor overwhelmed straight counterparts get used to us.
I hate when TWDC loses money on a movie no matter what the content is.
I love when TWDC makes money on a movie no matter what the content is.
I personally liked many of the movies they lost money on in the past.
As a result of the success of inside out 2, my hope is that TWDC will not think that sequels make money, my hope is TWDC will learn that making good movies makes money.
Well, we’re talking about people who never saw the film to form an opinion about it in the first place—people who supposedly harbour such prejudice towards the gay community that they can’t bear the thought of their children knowing about its existence. But that’s OK, because the world is imperfect and we queers should remain patient for a few more centuries while our poor overwhelmed straight counterparts get used to us.
Prejudice is all around us and and is applied for any and all differences. I once witnessed a gay person showing prejudice against a trans person. It blew my mind.
Folks must try to accept folks for who they are inside; not their sexual preference, not how they identify or even their least relevant attribute, their politics.
I will now attempt to step down off my soap box without breaking my hip.
I never said prejudice wasn’t a widespread and multifaceted problem. The topic that was brought up (not by me) was homosexuality in Strange World, and that’s the one I’ve been addressing. Of course there are other kinds of bigotry and injustice that also need attention.
As a result of the success of inside out 2, my hope is that TWDC will not think that sequels make money, my hope is TWDC will learn that making good movies makes money.
Except that percentage wise that doesn't seem to be true.
Remakes and sequels make more money than original or adaptations when it comes to movies these days. I hate it personally, but people are just less likely to turn out in large numbers for something new they have to take a chance on and it feels like it has been that way for a while now. These movies are just easier to market and come with a prebuilt audience that is likely to come out and spread the word.
With that in mind, I went and looked up the worldwide box office numbers by year since the turn of the century. Just looking at the top 10 grossing films of each year (skipping the decimated theatrical covid years of 2020 and 2021) I get:
2023 - 1 original
2022 - 0 original
2019 - 0 original
2018 - 1 original
2017 - 0 original
2016 - 1 original
2015 - 2 original
2014 - 1 original
2013 - 1 original
2012 - 1 original
2011 - 0 original
2010 - 1 original
2009 - 5 originals
2008 - 5 originals
2007 - 3 originals
2006 - 4 originals
2005 - 4 originals
2004 - 5 originals
2003 - 3 originals
2002 - 4 originals
2001 - 5 originals (an argument could be made for one or two more)
2000 - 8 originals
Sure, we could expand outside of the top 10, which would be fascinating to see and I think would make originals look slightly better, but, even with the limited sample size I am using, you can see the general pattern. People could also argue on what qualifies as an original here and there but by and large those numbers are going to be close. With those caveats in mind, it is hard to look at the numbers and think anything other than people want more of the same.
As a quick aside, I think it is interesting that 2010 seems to be the turning point for the most recent trend. My guess is this is the first crop of movies largely produced in the post 2008 crash so executives were being cautious. After seeing it work for a few years, they just stuck with it. Obviously just a theory but I have been racking my brain for any other events/cultural shift dating back to around that time and have come up blank.
Finally, for anyone wondering about 2024 it is looking to continue the same trend.
Except that percentage wise that doesn't seem to be true.
Remakes and sequels make more money than original or adaptations when it comes to movies these days. I hate it personally, but people are just less likely to turn out in large numbers for something new they have to take a chance on and it feels like it has been that way for a while now. These movies are just easier to market and come with a prebuilt audience that is likely to come out and spread the word.
With that in mind, I went and looked up the worldwide box office numbers by year since the turn of the century. Just looking at the top 10 grossing films of each year (skipping the decimated theatrical covid years of 2020 and 2021) I get:
2023 - 1 original
2022 - 0 original
2019 - 0 original
2018 - 1 original
2017 - 0 original
2016 - 1 original
2015 - 2 original
2014 - 1 original
2013 - 1 original
2012 - 1 original
2011 - 0 original
2010 - 1 original
2009 - 5 originals
2008 - 5 originals
2007 - 3 originals
2006 - 4 originals
2005 - 4 originals
2004 - 5 originals
2003 - 3 originals
2002 - 4 originals
2001 - 5 originals (an argument could be made for one or two more)
2000 - 8 originals
Sure, we could expand outside of the top 10, which would be fascinating to see and I think would make originals look slightly better, but, even with the limited sample size I am using, you can see the general pattern. People could also argue on what qualifies as an original here and there but by and large those numbers are going to be close. With those caveats in mind, it is hard to look at the numbers and think anything other than people want more of the same.
As a quick aside, I think it is interesting that 2010 seems to be the turning point for the most recent trend. My guess is this is the first crop of movies largely produced in the post 2008 crash so executives were being cautious. After seeing it work for a few years, they just stuck with it. Obviously just a theory but I have been racking my brain for any other events/cultural shift dating back to around that time and have come up blank.
Finally, for anyone wondering about 2024 it is looking to continue the same trend.
As a quick aside, I think it is interesting that 2010 seems to be the turning point for the most recent trend. My guess is this is the first crop of movies largely produced in the post 2008 crash so executives were being cautious. After seeing it work for a few years, they just stuck with it. Obviously just a theory but I have been racking my brain for any other events/cultural shift dating back to around that time and have come up blank.
Thanks for this analysis. I did something similar hundreds of pages ago now showing that a high percentage of recent hit movies were either already established IP and/or direct sequels. People continue to claim that "good" original movies will break the pattern, but the masses apparently have a very narrow definition of good because it just hasn't been happening.
re: 2008-2010 -- I wonder if some of this is because of the MCU. Everyone started trying to build their own franchises in response to that, and many studios found some success with that. Many started looking around for other properties with built-in name recognition that they could bring to the screen and build from there.
My partner and I have been together since some of our nieces and nephews were toddlers. They have no memories or knowledge of us as anything but a couple. How would the arbitrary “not below 12” cut-off point work in a case like ours? For that matter, what should my partner and I do when we’re walking hand-in-hand down a street where someone else’s child might catch sight of us?
The horse has already bolted. If society is claiming to treat us as equal to our straight counterparts, we can’t be expected to hide away in the closet again.
It's kind of crazy to see someone describe being treated as a secret or second class person by their awful family, and somehow thinking that's okay or should be the norm.
Trauma can do that I guess.
Personally, I'd be thinking of better ways to treat people, not demonizing them as unsuitable for children.
Domestically I actually think it’s much simpler. They made a movie about 50’s era sci fi pulp and marketed it to millennial parents and gen alpha kids. Neither of those demographics are nostalgic for 50’s pulp fiction. It was kind of a stupid framing decision. It was quite bland and as a hyper consumer of all things Disney, I haven’t actually watch Strange World myself. It just didn’t look very good.
I can't disagree with this, even though I rather enjoyed Strange World. I was strangely very much in the crosshairs for this, though. Fan of pulps? Check. Receptive to a story that is expressly showing other ways of being a man than stereotypical masculinity? Check. Concerned about climate change and/or energy production transformation? Check. Heck, I'd even coincidentally seen two of the screenwriter's plays (Vietgone and She Kills Monsters) in the month before SW's release, so I was attuned to his sense of humor, etc.
It's kind of crazy to see someone describe being treated as a secret or second class person by their awful family, and somehow thinking that's okay or should be the norm.
Trauma can do that I guess.
Personally, I'd be thinking of better ways to treat people, not demonizing them as unsuitable for children.
I’m not going to call anyone’s family here awful. Goodness knows I faced my own issues with my father, who took much longer to accept my sexuality than he should have. But I agree that we should be looking to make progress, not perpetuating the prejudices that we ourselves may have experienced.
Except that percentage wise that doesn't seem to be true.
Remakes and sequels make more money than original or adaptations when it comes to movies these days. I hate it personally, but people are just less likely to turn out in large numbers for something new they have to take a chance on and it feels like it has been that way for a while now. These movies are just easier to market and come with a prebuilt audience that is likely to come out and spread the word.
With that in mind, I went and looked up the worldwide box office numbers by year since the turn of the century. Just looking at the top 10 grossing films of each year (skipping the decimated theatrical covid years of 2020 and 2021) I get:
2023 - 1 original
2022 - 0 original
2019 - 0 original
2018 - 1 original
2017 - 0 original
2016 - 1 original
2015 - 2 original
2014 - 1 original
2013 - 1 original
2012 - 1 original
2011 - 0 original
2010 - 1 original
2009 - 5 originals
2008 - 5 originals
2007 - 3 originals
2006 - 4 originals
2005 - 4 originals
2004 - 5 originals
2003 - 3 originals
2002 - 4 originals
2001 - 5 originals (an argument could be made for one or two more)
2000 - 8 originals
Sure, we could expand outside of the top 10, which would be fascinating to see and I think would make originals look slightly better, but, even with the limited sample size I am using, you can see the general pattern. People could also argue on what qualifies as an original here and there but by and large those numbers are going to be close. With those caveats in mind, it is hard to look at the numbers and think anything other than people want more of the same.
As a quick aside, I think it is interesting that 2010 seems to be the turning point for the most recent trend. My guess is this is the first crop of movies largely produced in the post 2008 crash so executives were being cautious. After seeing it work for a few years, they just stuck with it. Obviously just a theory but I have been racking my brain for any other events/cultural shift dating back to around that time and have come up blank.
Finally, for anyone wondering about 2024 it is looking to continue the same trend.
Great post. I’d argue that adaptations of very prominent pre-existing material should be counted with reboots and sequels - I don’t think we can lump things like Twilight and Transformers with true, untested IPs. If we remove those, the pre-2010 number of originals gets much smaller. In fact, the only studio consistently producing successful originals was Disney, via Pixar and Disney Animation.
I can't disagree with this, even though I rather enjoyed Strange World. I was strangely very much in the crosshairs for this, though. Fan of pulps? Check. Receptive to a story that is expressly showing other ways of being a man than stereotypical masculinity? Check. Concerned about climate change and/or energy production transformation? Check. Heck, I'd even coincidentally seen two of the screenwriter's plays (Vietgone and She Kills Monsters) in the month before SW's release, so I was attuned to his sense of humor, etc.
It was OK. Toxic masculinity Grandpa was cringe for a bit, and the big reveal was kind of a letdown for me. I didn’t hate it by any means, and appreciated the representation of a dad (and mom) who were cool with their kid being gay.
Great post. I’d argue that adaptations of very prominent pre-existing material should be counted with reboots and sequels - I don’t think we can lump things like Twilight and Transformers with true, untested IPs. If we remove those, the pre-2010 number of originals gets much smaller. In fact, the only studio consistently producing successful originals was Disney, via Pixar and Disney Animation.
live action remakes.
