Your quotation was, “and still, no one can point to a film that didn't deserve the box office it received.”
In the context of my post, and all the others, I'm clearly talking about the last two ish years of Disney films. That's the point at hand.
You’re trying to artificially limit examples to bolster the absurd claim that films earn what they deserve, something the entire history of popular media proves untrue.
I'm really not. Go back to my posts where I talk about how often good films don't succeed. Or how transformers made billions on some really bad films. Or go back to when I was one of very few saying Princess and the frog should have been a big success. It does happen and I've never denied that.
We aren't talking about the entire history of cinema here. We're talking about Disney and what happened with their last couple years of fims. And what movie that failed, should have been a huge success if it wasn't for the hate network pulling it down. Not that doesn't exist, not that it doesn't have an effect, not that there aren't people out to get Disney.
You are determined to pretend all the “bad things” in society are completely powerless and inconsequential, mere nuisances, and that is not a truthful or useful position.
The impasse we have is, you are on team it's killing all the movies. While I have said it has an impact, but I don't believe it is enough to hurt these movies to account for the amount of underperformance. I'm not determined to pretend anything. You know what's also not useful? Looking at everything with a jaded eye, always looking for the hidden motivation.
TLM was absolutely no worse then live-action remake blockbusters like Aladdin and Lion King and The Marvels, while suffering from a weak villain, was charming and fun and no worse then many very successful MCU films.
First off, I'd say it was worse than Aladdin and about the same as lion king. I mean the scuttlebutt is one of the worst pieces of music in a Disney anything. What it showed me, is people rejected a sub par remake of a classic. The same thing happened to me with transformers. I was opening day for the first and the second. Saw the third a bit later, and by the 4th I was waiting for rental. And the 5th? I still haven't seen. Bumblebee had good word of mouth so I saw it.
As far as the marvels. It didn't just suffer from a weak villain. Sure Iman was charming, but that film had some serious issues. And I wouldn't say Brie as one of them, she was actually more likeable in it than the first. It wasn't a good MCU film in my opinion. The story was inconsistent, do we have to bring up the singing planet, it was tough to watch in parts.
Does lightyear do better without the "controversy"? Probably a bit. But if that 10 or so minutes was never there, it's still not anywhere close to a hit.
Again, this is a futile exercise, because the “quality equals box office” argument is absurd on its face and all sorts of deserving films have underperformed in the last two years.
Two can play. Again, I never said quality equals box office. That's just what you want to hear. I've said many times, quality is your best chance for box office success in my opinion. I've also said it doesn't always work out that way. Consistent quality usually wins out in the end. But I'll say it again. Was Pixars success built on quality? Or was it built on mediocre to poor films? Pixars strong track record in quality alowed something mediocre like cars 2 to still do 560mil. If the films leading up to cars 2 were all meh, I have no doubt it doesn't do what it did.