'Strange World' Disney's 2022 Animated Film

[MisterPenguin]

There's no guarantee Strange World would have been a smash hit. But it certainly couldn't have made it's performance any worse. And I'm of the opinion it would have made it more interesting to a wider audience.

If Pixar's Cars had been written today by the same HR committee that apparently got its hands on the Strange World script, I would imagine that Luigi and Guido would have been an out gay couple. And Sally would have rebuffed Lightning's advances because she was a Lesbian who had the hots for a saucy Subaru.

And if they'd gone down that road (get it?) with Cars, I would bet 20 churros that Cars would have been a flop on the scale of Strange World. American dads and young boys in large numbers would not want to see that movie, or acknowledge to friends that they liked it much. There would be no Cars merchandise sales to speak of either.

No matter how much our moral betters in Hollywood tried to shame America's males into liking that version of Cars.

Disney: ‘Cars’ Has Crossed $8 Billion in Global Retail Sales

The Disney/Pixar franchise now brings in more than $2 billion in global retail sales annually, making it one of the company's biggest franchises.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

And if you were active in this movie forum when Cars 2 came out, you'd be daily posting about its 39% Tomtatometer, it's A- CinemaScore, and how it didn't turn a profit in its theatrical window. And then writing Burbank's obituary over it. And proclaiming the Cars franchise is dead.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I never read Scar or Jafar as queer-coded. Their flamboyance came from their (pseudo-)British, somewhat Shakespearean theatricality. The same applies to Frollo and Ratcliffe.

Btw, if you ever want a horrifying read, check the real Ratcliffe's biography on Wikipedia. The film Pocahontas took some very generous liberties with historical facts, and lets just say that was probably a good thing that they didn't depict Ratcliffe's actual fate.

 

[CaptainMickey]

Disney would be very unwise to let Chinese censorship dictate its entertainment offerings.

As I said, time will tell. I believe queer representation in Disney is here to stay, and I don’t believe it will prove a reputational or financial liability in the long term. Feel free to tag me in five years or so if I turn out to be wrong.

Yeah, I don't think anyone is advocating for inserting Chinese propaganda. You did say you didn't think the few minute gay crush scene was any big deal. But, if that crush was on a girl instead, this movie would have been available to an additional 1.5 billion customers in the Chinese market alone. Along with the box office, now all that merch is relevant in that market. And there are 2 parks in China that will have no use for any IP from the movies with these kinds of themes. No one there would have heard of them unless they were edited out. It's another debate if we should be in the Chinese market at all, but Iger made a huge investment there (It's really his baby) and they need to see returns from all that money they spent. And there is a large percentage of people in the free world that really have no interest in it either. I know many on here think otherwise, but are probably drastically under estimating the desire for this content in G and PG family/children's content around the world. I'm sure it looks much different in California and the gay community, but just look at the numbers. It's interesting to see the lengths people will go to blame everything else for the poor performances of the movies. The only successful examples I've seen is where it's inserted into an established, successful franchise like Marvel or Star Wars that already has a massive, passionate audience. $200 million production animation movies need to have massive four quadrant worldwide appeal to work financially. The last few haven't worked at all. I can tell you and many others are very passionate about the representation, but it might not fit well or work for every product Disney releases. I can see D+/Hulu being a great places to build new diverse characters and stories, building a following and making bigger franchises when it becomes successful. I can tell from the thread that no one is going to budge an inch on their position so like you said, let's see what's working in 5 years. Disney is much different today then I though it would look 5 years ago, that's for sure!

 

[TwilightZone]

One thing I found interesting during my searches is a lot of movies were streaming exclusive here in the states, but had a theatrical window in other countries. This is why movies like "Trolls world tour" have a box office listing on wikipedia.

That probably helps....a lot.

 

[TwilightZone]

Yeah, I don't think anyone is advocating for inserting Chinese propaganda. You did say you didn't think the few minute gay crush scene was any big deal. But, if that crush was on a girl instead, this movie would have been available to an additional 1.5 billion customers in the Chinese market alone. Along with the box office, now all that merch is relevant in that market. And there are 2 parks in China that will have no use for any IP from the movies with these kinds of themes. No one there would have heard of them unless they were edited out. It's another debate if we should be in the Chinese market at all, but Iger made a huge investment there (It's really his baby) and they need to see returns from all that money they spent. And there is a large percentage of people in the free world that really have no interest in it either. I know many on here think otherwise, but are probably drastically under estimating the desire for this content in G and PG family/children's content around the world. I'm sure it looks much different in California and the gay community, but just look at the numbers. It's interesting to see the lengths people will go to blame everything else for the poor performances of the movies. The only successful examples I've seen is where it's inserted into an established, successful franchise like Marvel or Star Wars that already has a massive, passionate audience. $200 million production animation movies need to have massive four quadrant worldwide appeal to work financially. The last few haven't worked at all. I can tell you and many others are very passionate about the representation, but it might not fit well or work for every product Disney releases. I can see D+/Hulu being a great places to build new diverse characters and stories, building a following and making bigger franchises when it becomes successful. I can tell from the thread that no one is going to budge an inch on their position so like you said, let's see what's working in 5 years. Disney is much different today then I though it would look 5 years ago, that's for sure!

My friends are very lgbtq... none of them are interested in this movie or Lightyear. Of course small group, doesn't speak for ALL LGBTQ people, but they were upset at Disney for a variety of reasons, from lack of creativity, the bad business practices with VFX workers, and more I can't think of off the top of my head.

There's a larger story than what can be presented on the forums, with many people of all sides being upset at Disney for various reasons. There's more PR disasters that needs to be fixed than meets the eye.

 

[Prince-1]

I’d imagine there are all sorts of opinions at Disney right now. I believe the Chapeks and Igers of the world would rather steer clear of this stuff but felt the pressure to not only appease the vocal minority of Gen Z but also some of their employees.

Another winning post from you Mick. Yes a multi-billion company is making moves that is supposedly destroying their animated movie business (based on some of the absurdly stupid posts on here) just to appease a vocal minority. Not the majority mind you but the minority. Yep makes total sense!!!

I mean you can't teach comedy such as this.

 

[LittleBuford]

Btw, if you ever want a horrifying read, check the real Ratcliffe's biography on Wikipedia. The film Pocahontas took some very generous liberties with historical facts, and lets just say that was probably a good thing that they didn't depict Ratcliffe's actual fate.

Yikes! I had no idea!

 

[LittleBuford]

And there is a large percentage of people in the free world that really have no interest in it either. I know many on here think otherwise, but are probably drastically under estimating the desire for this content in G and PG family/children's content around the world.

I'm not saying there's a general "desire" for it. I'm saying most people don't care enough one way or the other for it to make an appreciable difference to how well a film performs at the box office.

It's interesting to see the lengths people will go to blame everything else for the poor performances of the movies.

You're the ones attributing the failure of Lightyear—a supremely boring film that I have no desire ever to rewatch—on a brief lesbian kiss rather than its poor overall quality. That's going to lengths to advance a particular ideological perspective.

 

[LittleBuford]

My friends are very lgbtq... none of them are interested in this movie or Lightyear.

Why would they be? Who here is saying that queer representation automatically renders a film good or appealing to queer people? Because I'm certainly not, and I haven't read any other posts to that effect.

 

[J4546]

hey probably dumb question but when they do box office totals, do they account for people with amc app? cause i pay a flat 20 a month and can see 3 a week though i normally watch like 3 a month, but how do they account for that?

 

[SuddenStorm]

I’d imagine there are all sorts of opinions at Disney right now. I believe the Chapeks and Igers of the world would rather steer clear of this stuff but felt the pressure to not only appease the vocal minority of Gen Z but also some of their employees.

It's worth noting that there is already evidence of this. Right leaning employees even penned an open letter requesting the company remain politically neutral, and that the environment within the company is becoming less than pleasant if you aren't progressive. I actually think the letter makes a number of good points.

A good friend of mine who used to work in senior management in California shared a number of stories with me after they left the company (for what it's worth, they are gay)- examples like the team they were on sitting down for a project and the person who assembled the team looking around and saying 'there's too many white people' here.

An African American friend of theirs who was passed up for a promotion got one for something similar shortly after the DEI stuff took off back in 2020- but instead of being thrilled, the person felt like they got it due to their ethnicity, not the merits of their work.

The person even said there isn't a place for a straight white conservative guy in the company right now, or at least in the division we were talking about.

I just hope the powers that be know what they're doing- because right now they have the potential to reimagine and reinvigorate the Disney brand for the next generation, or destroy 100 years of public affection for the Disney brand.

 

[MisterPenguin]

hey probably dumb question but when they do box office totals, do they account for people with amc app? cause i pay a flat 20 a month and can see 3 a week though i normally watch like 3 a month, but how do they account for that?

I would assume:

1. For the share of the ticket that the theater keeps, they waive that income.
2. For the share of the ticket that the theater pays the studio, they pay the studio.
3. They hope that the loyalty program pays for itself by:

a) The $20 a month you pay​

b) You (or a good portion of people in the program) don't use it that much​

c) Concessions, where theaters make most of their money selling you 12 cents worth of popcorn kernals and soda syrup for $12.​

 

[mickEblu]

It's worth noting that there is already evidence of this. Right leaning employees even penned an open letter requesting the company remain politically neutral, and that the environment within the company is becoming less than pleasant if you aren't progressive. I actually think the letter makes a number of good points.

A good friend of mine who used to work in senior management in California shared a number of stories with me after they left the company (for what it's worth, they are gay)- examples like the team they were on sitting down for a project and the person who assembled the team looking around and saying 'there's too many white people' here.

An African American friend of theirs who was passed up for a promotion got one for something similar shortly after the DEI stuff took off back in 2020- but instead of being thrilled, the person felt like they got it due to their ethnicity, not the merits of their work.

The person even said there isn't a place for a straight white conservative guy in the company right now, or at least in the division we were talking about.

I just hope the powers that be know what they're doing- because right now they have the potential to reimagine and reinvigorate the Disney brand for the next generation, or destroy 100 years of public affection for the Disney brand.

I almost forgot about that letter. Thanks for sharing as well as your friends stories. I hope they figure it out soon.

 

[TP2000]

And if you were active in this movie forum when Cars 2 came out, you'd be daily posting about its 39% Tomtatometer, it's A- CinemaScore, and how it didn't turn a profit in its theatrical window. And then writing Burbank's obituary over it. And proclaiming the Cars franchise is dead.

I saw Cars 2 at home. It wasn't good. But they were already selling Billions (with a B) of merchandise off of Cars. And just about to open this little gem, which is the best new land in any American Disney park since New Orleans Square.

The Cars franchise is far from dead. Even if Luigi's Flying Tires was dumb and had to be replaced.

 

[TP2000]

Yeah, I don't think anyone is advocating for inserting Chinese propaganda.

That part is huge. @jeangreyforever also mentioned this quite nicely. Communist China is up to no good.

So why are America's premiere companies like Disney there at all? And the current strategy of keeping most of their films out of the Chinese market seems to undercut the entire reason Bob Iger invested Billions into that country in the first place.

I'm baffled, and yet reminded that when you get into bed with Communists the morning after is very ugly.

(Not that I've ever slept with a Communist myself. I do have some standards!)

I know many on here think otherwise, but are probably drastically under estimating the desire for this content in G and PG family/children's content around the world. I'm sure it looks much different in California and the gay community, but just look at the numbers. It's interesting to see the lengths people will go to blame everything else for the poor performances of the movies.

There's another brilliant point. Everyone should read it again. The key words being "G" and "PG" rated "family/children's content" and also "just look at the numbers". From Disney, no less.

As a gay man who just moved from Southern California (Sorry Sacramento, find someone else to tax to the hilt!), and who has a few lifelong friends who are very liberal and thus dabbles in that social circle a bit, I can tell you that some people's worst fears about the worldview of California Gays is spot on. (In my case, also Seattle Gays and Portland Gays and a few DC Gays) They are childless and yet quick to look down on those who aren't gay and who have children, and who follow traditional societal norms in child rearing and/or are protective of their young children.

On the flip side, I have some friends who are Palm Springs Gays who have two twentysomething sons via a surrogate mother, which was ground breaking in the 1990's. And they're rather conservative and dislike all this sudden push of gay folks in the media! It turns out, gay people can be just as thought diverse as Black or Latinx Latino or White people!

Disney is much different today then I though it would look 5 years ago, that's for sure!

No kidding. The world will always change. But it's clear that America's parents aren't quite ready for it to change this much for children's animation released at Thanksgiving and marketed at families. That's the key difference that many here don't want to admit, and instead label anyone who pauses on that as a bigot or homophobe. They're not bigots and homophobes, they're just normal parents with 9 year old boys who aren't yet 14 and looking for a family movie.

 

[LittleBuford]

No kidding. The world will always change. But it's clear that America's parents aren't quite ready for it to change this much for children's animation released at Thanksgiving and marketed at families. That's the key difference that many here don't want to admit, and instead label anyone who pauses on that as a bigot or homophobe. They're not bigots and homophobes, they're just normal parents with 9 year old boys who aren't yet 14 and looking for a family movie.

I hope those poor children aren't scarred for life when they see my partner and me holding hands in the Magic Kingdom. Whatever will their non-bigoted, non-homophobic parents do to cleanse their delicate minds of such filth?

 

[TP2000]

I hope those poor children aren't scarred for life when they see my partner and me holding hands in the Magic Kingdom. Whatever will their non-bigoted, non-homophobic parents do to cleanse their delicate minds of such filth?

They won't be. The parents will move on quickly as parents are trained to do, much like they move on with other human-based issues that aren't quite ready to discuss with a 9 year old's developing mind.

But if you ask those same parents to shell out 60 bucks to take the family to a Disney cartoon that presents those same issues, those parents will likely decide not to spend their hard earned money on that. Instead they'll go play mini-golf that weekend, or host a campout in the backyard, or bust out the old DVD of Cars and fix some microwave popcorn.

Which is a big part of the reason Strange World was so historically disastrous at the box office, and oddly barely marketed by Disney after they spent $180 Million on it and released it at Thanksgiving.

 

[LittleBuford]

They won't be. The parents will move on quickly as parents are trained to do, much like they move on with other human-based issues that aren't quite ready to discuss with a 9 year old's developing mind.

But if you ask those same parents to shell out 60 bucks to take the family to a Disney cartoon that presents those same issues, those parents will likely decide not to spend their hard earned money on that. Instead they'll go play mini-golf that weekend, or host a campout in the backyard, or bust out the old DVD of Cars and fix some microwave popcorn.

Which is a big part of the reason Strange World was so historically disastrous at the box office, and oddly barely marketed by Disney after they spent $180 Million on it and released it at Thanksgiving.

You certainly have a talent for spinning a very rich narrative out of very little material. You've repeated your line about Strange World so many times now that one would believe it to be a cold hard fact backed up by actual data. Even I have to remind myself that what you're now describing as "a big part" of the film's failure was, the other day, secondary to other factors:

I think the film bombed because it had almost no marketing, many Disney fans themselves didn't even know it existed, and that it wasn't a very good movie to start with.

 

[ILoveWDW4ever]

For anyone wondering. This is Disneys reputation now.



They are a punchline.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I would assume:

1. For the share of the ticket that the theater keeps, they waive that income.
2. For the share of the ticket that the theater pays the studio, they pay the studio.
3. They hope that the loyalty program pays for itself by:

a) The $20 a month you pay​

b) You (or a good portion of people in the program) don't use it that much​

c) Concessions, where theaters make most of their money selling you 12 cents worth of popcorn kernals and soda syrup for $12.​

One of the things I learned about the theater industry working for AMC as a teenager- they're really snack purveyors who use the lure of movies to get people in the door. They'll take a loss on a ticket anytime, as long as enough people buy their snacks.