'Strange World' Disney's 2022 Animated Film

Chi84

Premium Member
Gays are 10% of the American population. Blacks are 13% of the American population. Asians are 8% of the American population. So why on earth would anyone expect Blacks and Gays and Asians to make up 40% or more of movie characters, film after film, year after year?
Good question. Maybe it’s to make up for all the decades when the movies pretended those people didn’t exist.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Exactly. DEI is important- but for Disney, so is making money. They will need to strike a balance- and if the DEI stuff is noticeably limiting the box office overseas that's something Disney will have to figure out.

It is, and they will.

The fact is that Strange World underperformed (the polite way of saying bombed) in overseas Western countries that allowed it to be shown at a greater rate than it bombed in the USA.

Apparently, Strange World was a total bomb everywhere. And it bombed even worse in foreign countries where allegedly hip and enlightened people live, unlike unfashionable American places like Ohio or Texas or Idaho. But the British and Belgians and French and Australians disliked Strange World even more than we did! Shocker! o_O
 

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
Stop making sense! You'll upset people!



But you reduced us in the gay community to that by claiming that Disney needs to be more "gaaaaayyyy" (your words), whatever the hell that means by adding all those extra vowels.

As a gay man who grew up in the last half of 20th century when being gay was literally a criminal act, I am more than extra vowels in the 21st century.

I am a person with my own thoughts and ideas and opinions and culture. Please respect my diversity, that's all I ask.



It's not even close to my bedtime, so I'm still up this evening. :cool:

Gays are 10% of the American population. Blacks are 13% of the American population. Asians are 8% of the American population. So why on earth would anyone expect Blacks and Gays and Asians to make up 40% or more of movie characters, film after film, year after year? Not to mention we didn't even discuss the biggest minority group, the Latinx Latinos who make up about a third of the American population?

Knowing that I am in a minority, about 10%, of the human population... why would I expect that I be represented in more than 10% of Disney film characters? Especially films aimed at small children whose parents probably aren't ready to discuss homosexuality with their 8 year old son?

Leave the gay stuff to the PG-13 movies, and they can underperform in the marketplace all on their own because of it.

But at least Burbank execs and HR ladies can feel good about themselves, even if they just cost their company profit. :rolleyes:
I reduced you to what now? I added the extra vowels and bolded the words for emphasis. You do it all the time. If you took offense, that wasn’t my intention. Considering my beliefs, that would think that I have somehow reduced all gay people to extra vowels literally makes zero sense. I’ve spoken up more for the advancement of the LGBTQ+ community here more than you have. Let’s keep it real. You tell jokes and make a mockery of young gay people who make statements for themselves and try to speak up for themselves and call gay people “boring,” but then turn around and accuse me of reducing the gay community to extra vowels. How sway?

@LittleBuford @Disney Analyst As gay men, if you felt like I reduced everyone in the gay community to the letters “a,” and “y,” (I’m not even sure what that means), please let me know.

Nothing about this stuff you’re going on about in regards to being a minority resonates with me. I’m a minority and will NEVER question why I can’t be represented more and would NEVER encourage black people to stop asking for more representation. I don’t believe in expecting less representation simply because I’m black and a minority. Imagine me telling young black children to expect less. Never, ever. Same for the LGBTQ+ community.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Good question. Maybe it’s to make up for all the decades when the movies pretended those people didn’t exist.

Great.

So for the next 50 years you are going to put nothing but Black Lesbian Paraplegics in all your romantic comedies?

Again, I'm in a minority class as a gay man who can make a great cocktail and throw out a witty line.

Just a few decades ago my mere existence was illegal and prevented me from serving in the Armed Forces or US federal government because I was inherently immoral and a national security risk. The joke is that I was an enlisted member of the Armed Forces for more than four years, but we'll pretend I just never found the right girl. ;)

I was also asked to stop attending my Lutheran church in downtown Seattle, due to my "chosen sinful lifestyle" (their words). The same Lutheran church that now has photos on its website of rainbow flags and Black Lives Matter banners, because they need to keep the collection plates full in the 21st century. Apparently God changed his mind since 1978?

With all that said, the last thing I want is for the next 50 years of cinema to feature nothing but racial and sexual minorities in all manner of films, from Disney cartoons at Thanksgiving to RomComs in May and June. Because that's not the current reality. The current reality is that gays make up about 10% of American society, Blacks make up 13% of American society, Whites make up 60% of American society, etc., etc.

We can't atone for 120 years of previous omissions by making all future films for the next 50 years full of nothing but racial and sexual and HR approved minorities. That would just be dumb and super cringey.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
I reduced you to what now? I added the extra vowels and bolded the words for emphasis. You do it all the time.

I do it all the time because it's my scene. It's not your scene, so you should be careful when you try to speak for a community that you are not a part of. But tread lightly, and we'll welcome you with open arms!

If you took offense, that wasn’t my intention.

Thank you. Apology accepted. It's the internet after all, and the typed word is harder than the spoken word to communicate with! It's fine, we'll move on. :)

Considering my beliefs, that would think that I have somehow reduced all gay people to extra vowels literally makes zero sense. I’ve spoken up more for the advancement of the LGBTQ+ community here more than you have. Let’s keep it real.

You say that as if you get extra credit points somewhere for such a thing.

I merely ask that you acknowledge I have a lived experience of the 1960's/70's/80's that is radically different and much more difficult than your HR protected life in the 2020's.

Please respect my lived experience, that was often painful. My own government considered me a National Security Threat by my mere existence. Let that sink in.

Nothing about this stuff you’re going on about in regards to being a minority resonates with me. I’m a minority and will NEVER question why I can’t be represented more and would NEVER encourage black people to stop asking for more representation. I don’t believe in expecting less representation simply because I’m black and a minority. Imagine me telling young black children to expect less. Never, ever. Same for the LGBTQ+ community.

I just think that minorities like ourselves should be represented truthfully and believably. Gays are only 10% of the population, so let's not make 30% or more of Disney film characters gay. Because that would be fake and dumb.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Gays are only 10% of the population, so let's not make 30% or more of Disney film characters gay. Because that would be fake and dumb.
You have to give them some leeway though. Who’s going to be in charge of making sure 10% of Disney film characters are gay? They may err on the side of too much representation to make up for the total lack of it in times past.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
You have to give them some leeway though. Who’s going to be in charge of making sure 10% of Disney film characters are gay? They may err on the side of too much representation to make up for the total lack of it in times past.

Agreed. Which is why I purposely chose 30% as the point where it becomes cringey and dumb.

20% is probably going to have to be the benchmark for the 2020's, because of the lack thereof in previous decades. But even that is a stretch, and it must be handled very carefully. Shoehorning it in to every family animated film that comes along twice per year isn't helping the cause.

Everyone just needs to relax. Calm down. Space it out. Wait for a story or character that really makes sense. Then it will feel more organic and natural. And dare I say, entertaining?!?

That last word, "entertaining", might seem shocking to some who are stuck in a loop of HR approved slogans and talking points, but this is the entertainment industry after all. And the audience votes with their wallet. 💲💲💲

As of now, it just feels forced and fake at best, and offensive at worst. Executives in Burbank are checking boxes and pumping up their annual bonus with this stuff. It's dumb, and you can spot it from a mile away.
 

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
I do it all the time because it's my scene. It's not your scene, so you should be careful when you try to speak for a community that you are not a part of. But tread lightly, and we'll welcome you with open arms!



Thank you. Apology accepted. It's the internet after all, and the typed word is harder than the spoken word to communicate with! It's fine, we'll move on. :)



You say that as if you get extra credit points somewhere for such a thing.

I merely ask that you acknowledge I have a lived experience of the 1960's/70's/80's that is radically different and much more difficult than your HR protected life in the 2020's.

Please respect my lived experience, that was often painful. My own government considered me a National Security Threat by my mere existence. Let that sink in.



I just think that minorities like ourselves should be represented truthfully and believably. Gays are only 10% of the population, so let's not make 30% or more of Disney film characters gay. Because that would be fake and dumb.
I’m always careful about what I say. How do you know I’m not queer? I’ve already been welcomed by many gay people, both here and outside this forum. You and I don’t get along, and that’s fine.

I’m not concerned about “extra points” for a game I’m not playing. I simply stated that to make a point and state facts. I’m not concerned earning any brownie points from you.

You’ve mentioned your age range many times. I don’t know you personally, but based on facts about yourself, I can infer that you, as a gay man, have experienced some hardships. Don’t refer to my life as “protected.” Just like you, I’ve gone through some hardships, specifically as a black woman. “Protected” and black women have never matched.

Agree to disagree. I want more representation for minorities.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Agreed. Which is why I purposely chose 30% as the point where it becomes cringey and dumb.

20% is probably going to have to be the benchmark for the 2020's, because of the lack thereof in previous decades. But even that is a stretch, and it must be handled very carefully. Shoehorning it in to every family animated film that comes along twice per year isn't helping the cause.

Everyone just needs to relax. Calm down. Space it out. Wait for a story or character that really makes sense. Then it will feel more organic and natural. And dare I say, entertaining?!?

That last word, "entertaining", might seem shocking to some who are stuck in a loop of HR approved slogans and talking points, but this is the entertainment industry after all. And the audience votes with their wallet. 💲💲💲

As of now, it just feels forced and fake at best, and offensive at worst. Executives in Burbank are checking boxes and pumping up their annual bonus with this stuff. It's dumb, and you can spot it from a mile away.
That’s a reasonable take. I suppose I’m less bothered by what some consider over representation. I figure Disney is trying to do the right thing by representing marginalized groups so I’m less critical.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
You’ve mentioned your age range many times. I don’t know you personally, but based on facts about yourself, I can infer that you, as a gay man, have experienced some hardships. Don’t refer to my life as “protected.” Just like you, I’ve gone through some hardships, specifically as a black woman. .

You've shown us photos of yourself, and explained your career as a ride operator at Disneyland in the 2010's. You have presented yourself here as a cisgender Black woman aged 28 to 35.

Knowing that basic timeline, it is a simple fact that your government has never classified you as a National Security Threat, you have never been threatened with Dishonorable Discharge and criminal proceedings for being you, nor have you ever been denied entry to a hospital hospice wing because of who you are and the relationship you have with the registered patient.

I have a lived life that has many twists and turns. I'm proud that I can look back and laugh at it, instead of cry. :)
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
That’s a reasonable take. I suppose I’m less bothered by what some consider over representation. I figure Disney is trying to do the right thing by representing marginalized groups so I’m less critical.

I can agree with that. And I honestly don't envy them, when I'm in a generous mood.

But it just seems so heavy-handed and pompous. You watch those Zoom calls of Karey Burke from 2021, and you see the language used in official quotes and marketing. And it's just pukey and fake.

I would normally be willing to cut them some slack and give them some credit. They're trying. But then they ladle on the hipster crap so heavily and so quickly, and it ruins it. And the fact they so publicly look down on anyone who even so much as pauses at this sudden change, and they just come off as jerky snobs. They're insufferable with the disdain they have for their own audience and customers. Talk about living in a bubble!

Which is why I chuckle when their mega-budget movies bomb as big as they have recently. Strange World might have been the final straw, but we'll have to see with Wish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
You've shown us photos of yourself, and explained your career as a ride operator at Disneyland in the 2010's. You have presented yourself here as a cisgender Black woman aged 28 to 35.

Knowing that basic timeline, it is a simple fact that your government has never classified you as a National Security Threat, you have never been threatened with Dishonorable Discharge and criminal proceedings for being you, nor have you ever been denied entry to a hospital hospice wing because of who you are and the relationship you have with the registered patient.

I have a lived life that has many twists and turns. I'm proud that I can look back and laugh at it, instead of cry. :)
I can be cisgender, black, in my 30s, and absolutely queer. You don’t know me.

I’m not one to participate in the Oppression Olympics. Your experiences are not mine, mine are not yours. I’ve been through things that you, as a white man, will never experience.

I’m going to sleep now.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
What did Universal know in 2022 that Disney didn't?

How can two companies located just a few miles from each other, one in Burbank and one in Universal City, with similar historical backgrounds and similar current business models, have such different years? Just a string of bad luck for Burbank not helped by that bozo Bob Chapek who didn't have a post-Covid exit strategy? Or is it something else?

2022 Financial Summary

Universal/Dreamworks Animation (Sing 2, The Bad Guys, Minions Rise of Gru)
2022 Production Budgets = $245 Million
2022 Global Box Office = $1.6 Billion
(with a B)

Disney/Pixar Animation (Turning Red, Lightyear, Strange World)
2022 Production Budgets = $550 Million
2022 Global Box Office = $324 Million
(and slowly counting for Strange World)


 
Last edited:

TwilightZone

Well-Known Member
I think I was doing sony a disservice by removing them from my old price chart, since I just remembered that Cloudy with a Chance of meatballs existed, and that came out in 2009. I dislike realizing movies are older than I think they are, but it's a fact to be acknowledged sometimes.

Sony movie box office and budget
sony.png


Honestly I am really surprised by these, because they all seem like movies that just sorta happened and then disappeared from public concisouness, but apparently they made back their money.

I left out "Michelle vs. The Machines" and "Vivo" because they are streaming exclusive, and thus don't have a box office listed on wikipedia.
 

TwilightZone

Well-Known Member
Box office mojo-fied charts now. I put it as Inflation Adjusted. Whoops a couple of these are "actuals". Too lazy to fix rn. Sorry.
1670845299245.png


For some reason, I wasn't able to get "trolls world tour" to appear here. RIP

Same list with "Strange World" instead of HTTYD

1670845507028.png


1670845614512.png

Wow look at secret life of pets 2 and minons 2!

1670845713470.png

It could only show Angry Birds 2 because of streaming exclusives I assume.

And for complete fairness here's disney and pixars recent output compared to strange world
1670845872755.png
'
1670846087243.png

Wow incredibles 2 and TS4 did a lot better than I expected, I guess that's the power of brand recognition.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom