'Strange World' Disney's 2022 Animated Film

[TP2000]

Although facetiously many also have two moms or dads. It would be odd if they barred the entire Disney back catalogue (ironically including Strange World), because it features straight content.

I understand that. I actually have old friends who are in that boat. They are gay men who had twin boys via a surrogate mother in the 1990's, when they were already in middle age. That was groundbreaking then! The stories they tell of navigating Cub Scouts and soccer leagues circa 2003 with their boys would make you laugh and cry at the same time. And they were raising them in the very gay-friendly Palm Springs area!

But I am also adept enough at statistics to know those families are still a tiny, tiny minority of the American population. Even today.

Not to throw it back on you though, but I’m curious why you’d also share that perspective (discomfort around exposing children) to a topic you are presumably more comfortable with. Not in the context of forcing it upon other families, but for example if you had a niece or nephew and a supportive ally in a sibling, why wouldn’t you go to one of those movies with them?

Thinking back on my babysitting days when my nephews were young, I just don't think I wanted to wade into that topic with them. It wasn't my place. It wasn't appropriate. It was inherently sexual, and that's simply not okay to discuss with children. Especially children who are not your own.

My sister told me that she explained my sexuality and why I didn't have a wife to her boys individually, both when they were early-teens. Both boys went "Oh, I get it!". They may have already known for a year or two based off of scientific information learned on the play ground, but they at least played it off as though Mom was letting them in on a family secret and admitting them into a more mature stage of life. I should ask them sometime! (Dammit, they already left and flew back home from their Christmas visit!)

But I certainly wasn't going to bring it up. That was her job, her responsibility, her right as the parent.

I do broadly think this whole Disney pushing the envelope thing with strange world is kind of surprising. Considering what the put out for kids in the 80’s.

View attachment 689524

I watched this as Epcot when I was ‘just’ 6.

I mentioned it earlier, but it sort of meshed around in my brain over dinner just now. I think Disney is having problems with pushing cultural envelopes. It's just not been their brand or their business model for the past 100 years. Parents are hesitant to let Disney do that for them. I think Burbank needs to rethink their business strategy on pushing cultural boundaries with their children's films.

Leave that stuff for PG-13 or higher, if they feel the need to do it. It's clearly not working well for them at the PG animation level.

 

[mickEblu]

And again if the reason why this bombed was because of parents not wanting their kids to see an innocent crush between a boy and another boy they would not allow it on their TV at home at all and it would have bombed once again but it didn’t. Bad logic Mick.

So because there are enough people who have no issues with this movie to keep it in the # 1 spot for a week against the likes of Home Alone (1990) that means people didn’t boycott the movie? What kind of logic is that?

 

[Californian Elitist]

Loved it! Bought the soundtrack on iTunes. I even like the Clades’ song.

Its composer, Henry Jackman, ironically also did the music for the first Puss in Boots film.

Listening to it now! The music is definitely the best thing about the movie. Would love to hear it live.

 

[TP2000]

I am just looking for proof for this statement.

Here's your proof.

You can adjust things by 10% or 20% with excuses about "franchises" and "weather", but it's pretty clear how these two family animated films performed during the 2022 Holiday Season. Burbank's decision to not market Strange World was obviously a huge reason why the film failed. So we must ask ourselves "Why did Burbank choose not to market Strange World on purpose?"

 

[Prince-1]

So because there are enough people who have no issues with this movie to keep it in the # 1 spot for a week against the likes of Home Alone (1990) that means people didn’t boycott the movie? What kind of logic is that?

You have zero proof of anybody boycotting the movie in large numbers. And again if they boycotted it in the theaters they would’ve done the same thing at home where they have just as much control over their Disney+ account. What kind of logic is that Mick?

 

[Prince-1]

Here's your proof.

You can adjust things by 10% or 20% with excuses about "franchises" and "weather", but it's pretty clear how these two family animated films performed during the 2022 Holiday Season. Burbank's decision to not market Strange World was obviously a huge reason why the film failed. So we must ask ourselves "Why did Burbank choose not to market Strange World on purpose?"

View attachment 689525

See now you’re just embarrassing yourself. This does not show any boycotting of the movie because of a gay crush. It shows that people didn’t go see the movie but nothing about the reason why. It is cute that you tried so I do appreciate that.

 

[mickEblu]

You have zero proof of anybody boycotting the movie in large numbers. And again if they boycotted it in the theaters they would’ve done the same thing at home where they have just as much control over their Disney+ account. What kind of logic is that Mick?

Aside from the 1000s of comments I’ve read online stating such let’s simplify things- do you know who makes up a large part of Middle America? Do you think they were running to take their kids to see Strange World? You know, the “bigots” as you guys around here like to say.

 

[TP2000]

See now you’re just embarrassing yourself. This does not show any boycotting of the movie because of a gay crush. It shows that people didn’t go see the movie but nothing about the reason why. It is cute that you tried so I do appreciate that.

Did I ever say there was an organized boycott of Strange World? I don't remember that at all.

I think you may have thought I imagined some organized boycott of the film, like that ridiculous thing the Southern Baptists tried in the 2000's with Disney World.

I think Strange World failed mostly because it wasn't marketed at all. And I think a smaller percentage of its failure is due to parents learning from their own research and social groups (Facebook, etc.) that it featured a gay teenage boy as the main protagonist in the film, and their natural hesitancy to allow their children under about age 12 to go see that movie because of that.

But a boycott? That seems wildly optimistic for a film most Americans didn't even know existed.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Y’all have literally zero concrete proof as to the actual reason(s) why million of Americans chose not to see this movie in theaters. No getting around that.

 

[mickEblu]

Did I ever say there was an organized boycott of Strange World? I don't remember that at all.

I think you may have thought I imagined some organized boycott of the film, like that ridiculous thing the Southern Baptists tried in the 2000's with Disney World.

I think Strange World failed mostly because it wasn't marketed at all. And I think a smaller percentage of its failure is due to parents learning from their own research and social groups (Facebook, etc.) that it featured a gay teenage boy as the main protagonist in the film, and their natural hesitancy to allow their children under about age 12 to go see that movie because of that.

But a boycott? That seems wildly optimistic for a film most Americans didn't even know existed.

Right. I didn’t use that term until other starting using it. Who said there was some huge organized effort against Strange World? Just parents who don’t feel comfortable taking their kids and expressing their opinion.

 

[Rich T]

I understand that. I actually have old friends who are in that boat. They are gay men who had twin boys via a surrogate mother in the 1990's, when they were already in middle age. That was groundbreaking then! The stories they tell of navigating Cub Scouts and soccer leagues circa 2003 with their boys would make you laugh and cry at the same time.

But I am also adept enough at statistics to know those families are still a tiny, tiny minority of the American population. Even today.



Thinking back on my babysitting days when my nephews were young, I just don't think I wanted to wade into that topic with them. It wasn't my place. It wasn't appropriate. It was inherently sexual, and that's simply not okay to discuss with children. Especially children who are not your own.

My sister told me that she explained my sexuality and why I didn't have a wife to her boys individually, both when they were mid-teens. Both boys went "Oh, I get it!". They may have already known for a year or two based off of scientific information learned on the play ground, but they at least played it off as though Mom was letting them in on a family secret and admitting them into a more mature stage of life. I should ask them sometime! (Dammit, they already left and flew back home from their Christmas visit!)

But I certainly wasn't going to bring it up. That was her job, her responsibility, her right as the parent.



I mentioned it earlier, but it sort of meshed around in my brain over dinner just now. I think Disney is having problems with pushing cultural envelopes. It's just not been their brand or their business model for the past 100 years. Parents are hesitant to let Disney do that for them. I think Burbank needs to rethink their business strategy on pushing cultural boundaries with their children's films.

Leave that stuff for PG-13 or higher, if they feel the need to do it. It's clearly not working well for them at the PG animation level.

A lot of this is just the time we all live in. Society will continue to evolve. There will be steps forward and back along the way.

Strange World would probably have underperformed (despite its good points) even if advertised well simply because it’s just a “good” animated sci-fi film and not a great one, just about on the exact same level as Treasure Planet and Atlantis. It’s perfect for streaming.

The public knows there’s never been a great animated sci-fi film yet.

The real test for public reaction will come if and when Disney or another studio releases a FANTASTIC, must-see animated family film that happens to feature a gay character.

But, again, as I’ve mentioned before, it’s sort of already happened with the How To Train Your Dragon films and nobody batted an eye.

 

[Prince-1]

Aside from the 1000s of comments I’ve read online stating such let’s simplify things- do you know who makes up a large part of Middle America? Do you think they were running to take their kids to see Strange World? You know, the “bigots” as you guys around here like to say.

Well that’s proof if I ever heard any. Who needs actual facts anymore to back up a controversial position when online comments will do. And make you are attributing the word bigot to the right person Mick because I’ve never used that word. In fact not sure if anyone here actually has. Maybe you are just projecting.

 

[mickEblu]

Well that’s proof if I ever heard any. Who needs actual facts anymore to back up a controversial position when online comments will do. And make you are attributing the word bigot to the right person Mick because I’ve never used that word. In fact not sure if anyone here actually has. Maybe you are just projecting.

So where’s your proof that it doesn’t have anything to do with the movie bombing?

Lol did you just pop in? The word has been used plenty. This thread just gets purged every 45 minutes.

 

[TP2000]

A lot of this is just the time we all live in. Society will continue to evolve. There will be steps forward and back along the way.

Strange World would probably have underperformed (despite its good points) even if advertised well simply because it’s just a “good” animated sci-fi film and not a great one, just about on the exact same level as Treasure Planet and Atlantis. It’s perfect for streaming.

The public knows there’s never been a great animated sci-fi film yet.

I think this was a real mistake in the non-marketing.

Imagine if they had actually marketed it, but had let on that there was a Fantastic Voyage type element to the plot instead of hiding that entirely. Boys love that kind of stuff! And Dads love stuff their boys love, because Dads used to be boys!

This could have been a Cars level success of a movie to build a franchise off of, capturing the boys that the Princess movies never will or can.

But it failed miserably. On so many levels.

The real test for public reaction will come if and when Disney or another studio releases a FANTASTIC, must-see animated family film that happens to feature a gay character.

You've got to wonder what the Burbank execs will be talking about on Tuesday morning when they return from their long Christmas break. There is A LOT OF WORK TO DO in Burbank right now. Future direction for family films is a big part of that.

 

[Prince-1]

And I think a smaller percentage of its failure is due to parents learning from their own research and social groups (Facebook, etc.) that it featured a gay teenage boy as the main protagonist in the film, and their natural hesitancy to allow their children under about age 12 to go see that movie because of that.

And once again I’m assuming you have some type of empirical evidence to support this. Now I would bet that there are some people that did not see the movie for this reason but that number is probably so small it did not do anything to the box office numbers. I mean Mick read “1000s” of comments saying so

 

[Prince-1]

So where’s your proof that it doesn’t have anything to do with the movie bombing?

Lol did you just pop in? The word has been used plenty. This thread just gets purged every 45 minutes.

Sorry Mick. I don’t have to provide proof as I’m not the one making that claim. That falls on the person(s) who is making the clean which is you and TP.

 

[TP2000]

And once again I’m assuming you have some type of empirical evidence to support this. Now I would bet that there are some people that did not see the movie for this reason but that number is probably so small it did not do anything to the box office numbers. I mean Mick read “1000s” of comments saying so

No, as I've stated, it's simply my opinion. And my opinion on this topic has changed/evolved a bit after the last six weeks on this thread.

What is your opinion why Strange World bombed so badly and was barely marketed after a $180 Million production budget?

 

[mickEblu]

Sorry Mick. I don’t have to provide proof as I’m not the one making that claim. That falls on the person(s) who is making the clean which is you and TP.

You made the claim that it has nothing to do with the bombing plenty of times as well as by how passionately you disagree with my claim.

 

[Prince-1]

No, as I've stated, it's simply my opinion. And my opinion on this topic has changed/evolved a bit after the last six weeks on this thread.

What is your opinion why Strange World bombed so badly and was barely marketed after a $180 Million production budget?

Ok good. As wrong as it is I’m good with you saying it’s an opinion.

As for my opinion, I think the movie just didn’t look very good and that people didn’t want to waste their money going to the theater knowing that it probably will be on Disney+ in a very short time. As for why Disney did not market it…I do not have a clue. Maybe they knew they had just a bad movie and they didn’t want to waste any more money on it.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Listening to it now! The music is definitely the best thing about the movie. Would love to hear it live.

I also loved the score. It’s stunning. The ballet over the acid lake was hilarious and beautiful.