MoonRakerSCM
Well-Known Member
Convo with my friends last night they're not against seeing IO2. So maybe ill see it in the coming weeks.
How it came up…last weekend when it was clear for EVERYONE that Inside out is a huge hit…the 2023 grievance committee tried to make a point that Doesn’t exist with it.How did we even get here in this discussion? Inside Out 2 — a good Disney movie — is doing phenomenally at the box office so this should theoretically be a happy time for all Disney fans. I do fear Disney may learn the wrong lessons (such as focusing more on franchises/sequels rather than prioritizing quality storytelling), but after such a disastrous 2023 this seems like good news for the company.
Bob gonna BobHad the Inside Out series been announced before this week? Because seeing Disney return to milking a successful franchise into what is sure to be diminishing returns shows they are so, so back.
Unfortunately the bar is higher for Moana and Lion King. Those things have to operate like Barbie or the underperformance narrative is gonna ramp up. Again.
That’s the point. It’s probably unsustainable at this level. Inside Out is benefiting from being the first Disney/Pixar animated franchise sequel in a while (five years?). It’s cashing in on pent-up demand. I’m actually wondering if Despicable Me may lose some business from people choosing to see the earlier release and deciding not to spend $$$ to see both.Why would both of those movies need to operate like Barbie? Early days, but Inside Out 2 is already doing that. If Disney is building its business plan (and if posters here are building their expectations around) every tentpole being a colossal outlying success, that's terribly unrealistic. Even if they are all of a similar, steady quality, that's just so unlikely to happen.
This doesn’t quite reflect what happened. Posters on both “sides” of the debate opened up the topic around the same time:How it came up…last weekend when it was clear for EVERYONE that Inside out is a huge hit…the 2023 grievance committee tried to make a point that Doesn’t exist with it.
They ruined their own Joy…no pun intended.
Bob gonna Bob
I guess she has no school friends with two moms or it would tank.
Wait, but how can that be? It should have been review bombed to oblivion. This all doesn't make sense anymore. Maybe everyone is too busy dumping on the acolyte and forgot? I just don't get it. I thought the whole world was against Disney. And everyone listend to click bait YouTubers to make their decisions? Or is that only when it's convenient?
I feel like older Disney films had much more overt sexuality than recent Disney animated movies, with the potential exception of Turning Red.Not that long ago…and I’m sure still for many…we tried to shield our kids from all sexuality…
When things happen that cause the loss of Innocence too soon…like many of us have…makes you realize that innocence is something worth preserving if you can.
I’m just a coger though
People fear change and variationSexuality in this context doesn’t describe sexual behaviour but simply one’s identity in relation to the gender one is attracted to. Children have never been shielded from this concept. On the contrary, we are all brought up knowing that men (typically) marry women. It’s among the earliest social norms that children are exposed to and taught. Being straight is just as much a form of sexuality as being gay.
It probably depends on which point of view you are looking through… I started responding when certain people were throwing backhanded shade at Disney with comments like this is what happens when you create a family movie that is ok to bring your kids to…I still don’t understand what was not kid friendly about the 2023 slateHow it came up…last weekend when it was clear for EVERYONE that Inside out is a huge hit…the 2023 grievance committee tried to make a point that Doesn’t exist with it.
I feel like older Disney films had much more overt sexuality than recent Disney animated movies, with the potential exception of Turning Red.
Aladdin and Jasmine and Pocahontas and John Smith had much more passionate kisses than anything Disney has allowed in an animated movie in the last 15 years. Mulan was checking out shirtless Li Shang. Megara was very seductive with Hercules and rejected an explicitly sexual advance from a centaur that captured her. Esmeralda did a pole dance and turned on all the male leads in the Hunchback of Notre Dame (with the villain singing an entire song about it). Nala gave Simba bedroom eyes during "Can You Feel the Love Tonight?" Chernabog created naked ladies to dance for him in Fantasia, and we got demon/harpy flying into the camera in that same sequence. In the Great Mouse Detective a female mouse takes off some of her clothing in a suggestive burlesque number. Ursula tells Ariel not to underestimate the importance of BODY LANGUAGE while shaking her butt.
I feel like it's revisionist history or nostalgia that blinds people to what the content of older Disney movies actually contained.
This was a basketball game… it wasn’t a hockey gameIt probably depends on which point of view you are looking through… I started responding when certain people were throwing backhanded shade at Disney with comments like this is what happens when create a family movie that is ok to bring your kids to…I still don’t understand what was not kid friendly about the 2023 slate
That’s the point. It’s probably unsustainable at this level. Inside Out is benefiting from being the first Disney/Pixar animated franchise sequel in a while (five years?). It’s cashing in on pent-up demand.
I’ve never once condoned that. And I fought against that as ALLY 30+ years ago. There was nothing “in it” for me…except you fight evil or you become its accomplice .Again, easy for you to say as someone entirely unaffected by the topic in question. You try living in a world where people attack you for your sexuality and then get back to me.
I feel what has changed — not just with Disney but entertainment in general — is that in the 80s/90s/early 2000s movie studios tried to appeal to adults in their family entertainment by having some sexual references and dark themes. Nowadays, I think there's more of an emphasis on finding a theme/message that resonates with people of all ages. That's why more modern Disney and Pixar films have become more sophisticated in the subject matter they tackle, without having any of the overtly scary or romantically charged moments of Classic Disney.But make no mistake…they are moving away because these issues can’t be easily made acceptable to Disneys MASS audience and they know it.
To be fair I was being a smart aleck because the usual backhand comments came out.This doesn’t quite reflect what happened. Posters on both “sides” of the debate opened up the topic around the same time:
I feel like older Disney films had much more overt sexuality than recent Disney animated movies, with the potential exception of Turning Red.
Aladdin and Jasmine and Pocahontas and John Smith had much more passionate kisses than anything Disney has allowed in an animated movie in the last 15 years. Mulan was checking out shirtless Li Shang. Megara was very seductive with Hercules and rejected an explicitly sexual advance from a centaur that captured her. Esmeralda did a pole dance and turned on all the male leads in the Hunchback of Notre Dame (with the villain singing an entire song about it). Nala gave Simba bedroom eyes during "Can You Feel the Love Tonight?" Chernabog created naked ladies to dance for him in Fantasia, and we got demon/harpy flying into the camera in that same sequence. In the Great Mouse Detective a female mouse takes off some of her clothing in a suggestive burlesque number. Ursula tells Ariel not to underestimate the importance of BODY LANGUAGE while shaking her butt.
I feel like it's revisionist history or nostalgia that blinds people to what the content of older Disney movies actually contained.
I plead guilt on that too…To be fair I was being a smart aleck because the usual backhand comments came out.
Well if it wasn't shielded from kids back in the 1950s then it shouldn't need to be shielded from kids in the 2020s for the same situation no matter the orientation of the people doing the kissing on-screen.At that time? Not Likely but not impossible.
You’re talking about a country where people had dates “supervised” and had to be out of each others house the night before the wedding by 9 pm.
My grandmother was one of them.
It’s not random we have a holiday dedicated to pilgrims
…do you think Bob would get more condolences from an edible arrangement or a candygram?There is absolutely an ongoing effort to target Disney and has been for a while now. It may not be YOUR reason(s) for laying into them but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Just last year I had an employee come up to me in the early summer and tell me in a very serious and concerned tone that Disney had an active campaign to groom children and I will burn for all eternity if I continue to see their movies, go to the parks, etc.
I had another one who was no longer going to let their children watch Disney content because "Ron told me it would make my kids trans."
Where do you think they got that from?
I don't know what you want to call it when politicians, content creators, news channels, articles, radio shows, podcasts and editorials all start saying the same thing, almost verbatim but to me it is easy to see the goal of BS like that and it isn't to help Disney sell more tickets.
Honestly, if you saw a bunch of positive Disney news that all sounded almost exactly the same across a bunch of forms of media you would be ALL over Disney with claims of buying people off or trying to push a narrative but somehow when it is negative that can't be the case?
I personally don't think it is a primary reason for issues with recent releases, but you can't tell me it doesn't exist or has zero impact with a straight face when we see it in these very threads ALL THE TIME.
Fair…Well if it wasn't shielded from kids back in the 1950s then it shouldn't need to be shielded from kids in the 2020s for the same situation no matter the orientation of the people doing the kissing on-screen.
The only people turning this "sexual" are those that consider it "icky".
I don't think anyone is claiming otherwise. People were discussing that impact on some of these more modern movements on Disney's overall box office. I happen to think it isn't large enough to make something a bomb but it certainly exists.Contrary to what dead judges say…Disney doesn’t have a “mind and soul”…They are out for money.
If they make it…great…if they don’t…fire away on the failures
No company on the planet is more guilty of being less intellectually stimulating/more dumbed down than DisneyAnd wasn't it great when they were treated as actual movies and not boring content for toddlers?
Even in The Princess and the Frog you had Naveen making a move on Tiana. Characters felt like actual human beings and not whatever they were on Wish.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.