Wish (Walt Disney Animation - November 2023)

[mickEblu]

Lightyear - Woke/ Bad Movie*
Strange World - Woke/ Bad Movie
Elemental - Woke Light/ Good Movie
Wish- Woke Light/ Decent Movie**

As you can see above if a movie is good AND also not woke it has the best chance for success


*based on Gazillion dollar Toy Story franchise

** movie didn’t have a chance due to compounding loss of trust/faith

 

[crispy]

I cited the trust metric not that long ago. It is reduced slightly, but by no means "gone," and certainly not enough to reduce ticket sales by over 50%. What's true for you and your personal experience is not true writ large.

No one says it's completely gone, but something (or many things) have moved the needle to make their audience not want to see Disney movies. Sure, other movies have bombed, but when most of your movies have bombed, there is a pattern that can't be ignored. Even the two that made money or broke even-ish, started very slow and were only saved by word of mouth.

There is more at work than just a lackluster year at the boxoffice.

 

[Miss Rori]

(I can't remember which reviewer it was, but one suggested, offhand, something rather intriguing: Dahlia being the lead in Wish rather than Asha. And just a quick character description suggests something more original and potentially interesting than Asha: A hardworking baker, who has a disability in a medieval land where it's possible for wishes to come true. Perhaps her wish is for her disability to be cured? What would her reaction be if she were to somehow find out the whole business is rigged, and while her wish might be seen as harmless enough to come true others' wouldn't be? Would she be willing to risk her wish not coming true for the sake of the others'? Would her own wish even matter to her that much? How would her condition affect her quest to help others, and her relationship with Star? There's your movie!)

 

[brideck]

Great analysis from top to bottom. I was truly beginning to wonder if anyone here was able to express complete thoughts.

Yeah, I think the culture war narrative leaves a lot of factors out. It's generally agreed that family animation as a whole has been off its box-office game since the pandemic due in part to multiple films, not just Disney/Pixar titles, ending up straight to streaming, with Illumination and Dreamworks' various modestly-budgeted titles being the luckiest due in part to having open-ended theatrical windows, often at times of year where there wasn't a ton of direct competition (Sing 2, Minions: The Rise of Gru, Puss in Boots - The Last Wish, and of course The Super Mario Bros. Movie as the examples; we'll see how Migration does next weekend). Besides those, there's Across the Spider-Verse, which managed to defy both superhero fatigue and family animation malaise despite featuring non-white protagonists, and - even if it wasn't quite profitable - Elemental, which hung on thanks in part to the open-ended run.

Migration will indeed be interesting to see. It's one of the few post-pandemic animated films to come out without some sort of built-in audience. The Bad Guys is the only other semi-major one I can think of (and it's based off of a book series, so that's only kind of true) and it didn't make it to $100 million domestic. On the flip side of the coin, it'll be interesting to see if Inside Out 2 can leverage its built-in audience next summer to better effect than Lightyear did. It should, since it's the same type of movie as its predecessors.

Going back to Wish's failure, this was just not a movie that was exciting the masses. Its promotional campaign from the first teaser through the first full-length trailer was half-hearted, and they never found a hook to capture audiences with. (It's been stated elsewhere, but who cares about a corporation's 100th anniversary?) The animation looked off to a lot of people, and the ads had trouble with the crucial big W's in pushing it: Who is Asha (besides a bit of a ditz)? What does she want; what is so bad about not everybody getting their wishes? Why is Magnifico a threat in a kingdom where things are pretty good under his rule, and why does Star come to her to help?

I also agree that there were a lot of interesting ideas sanded off, and I think it may have been because Disney was so scared of offending anyone. If Magnifico (and his wife!) are deceitful despots from the start (rather than him being misguided and from there wicked) and people are clearly suffering under their reign - if their wishes ended up being truly desperate, meaningful things like "Food on the table" or "A cure for illness" - it's even easier for people to read the political allegory they like or don't like into the story than it's been with the final product. Can't have a romance in the movie between Asha and Star because boys hate romance (Corporate Disney HATES the brand being perceived as girly!) and "girlbosses" think they make the woman weak. And the setting is intentionally supposed to be all things to all people (rather than the distinct cultural setting of Coco, Encanto, or an actual fairy or folk tale adaptation) so no one feels "left out", even if it means the Teens don't get actual characterizations because they're not gonna sell toys like Star and Valentino will so why focus on them?

I agree that I don't think the trailer for Wish was very informative at all. I was always going to see it (I see 100+ movies in the theater every year), but I don't know what the hook was supposed to be. They keep making movies that could really appeal to the Disney channel/tween demo on some level ("I'm a young girl -- I can make change in the world"), but seem really reticent to try to market movies to that group.

 

[Miss Rori]

Migration will indeed be interesting to see. It's one of the few post-pandemic animated films to come out without some sort of built-in audience. The Bad Guys is the only other semi-major one I can think of (and it's based off of a book series, so that's only kind of true) and it didn't make it to $100 million domestic.

Yeah, that's why I didn't list it with the others; I recalled that people liked it but it wasn't a huge deal. (Still - it does point to fresher IPs being a good idea right now...)

As for Migration - a few weeks ago I would have said that would be the big Christmas title, even more so after Wish faceplanted. Universal put that trailer before seemingly every kid-appeal movie over the summer/fall too, speaking to confidence. Illumination has cracked the code on broadly appealing kiddie comedies that will never get adults to come on their own (unless there's the nostalgia of a Mario Bros. at play?) but do satisfy kids and their parents. People love funny animals (or Minions), something Disney and Pixar haven't done in a while depending on what one regards Turning Red as!

But apparently the tracking's been lukewarm and Wonka's much-better-than-expected reviews, good start internationally, and just general pop-culture chatter might give that the upper hand - we'll start seeing where that goes tonight. (Hey, anybody here remember there's an Aquaman sequel next weekend too? Warner Bros. doesn't! They're going all-in on Wonka and The Color Purple advertising instead.)

I agree that I don't think the trailer for Wish was very informative at all. I was always going to see it (I see 100+ movies in the theater every year), but I don't know what the hook was supposed to be. They keep making movies that could really appeal to the Disney channel/tween demo on some level ("I'm a young girl -- I can make change in the world"), but seem really reticent to try to market movies to that group.

You'd think they'd have learned from Encanto's popularity in that regard. But saying that a girl can make positive change in the world? How woke! As I said, Disney's so scared to take a stand on anything. Sure people can get offended about a same-sex kiss for its very existence, but there's a flip side to that: People who would appreciate more representation don't like being thrown "diversity crumbs" that are easy to edit or apologize for. And good art doesn't come from desperation not to offend. Disney corporate wants to imagine a big tent where everybody can be equally happy but that isn't going to happen. They'll have to decide what they want to be, work accordingly, and risk losing some chunk of this theoretical audience.

Come to think of it, it's telling that a lot of people mistook/still mistake Asha for Isabella...the character the company thought would be the big merchandise-pusher...when that turned out to be Mirabel and Luisa, the latter having little merch initially made because she was stout and strong, because nobody likes a woman who's stout and strong...

 

[brideck]

But apparently the tracking's been lukewarm and Wonka's much-better-than-expected reviews, good start internationally, and just general pop-culture chatter might give that the upper hand - we'll start seeing where that goes tonight. (Hey, anybody here remember there's an Aquaman sequel next weekend too? Warner Bros. doesn't! They're going all-in on Wonka and The Color Purple advertising instead.)

I didn't even know Wonka was a musical until this week, so if it succeeds it won't be because of good marketing. I like Timothee Chalamet as much as the next guy, but the first trailer really didn't excite me at all.

Come to think of it, it's telling that a lot of people mistook/still mistake Asha for Isabella...the character the company thought would be the big merchandise-pusher...when that turned out to be Mirabel and Luisa, the latter having little merch initially made because she was stout and strong, because nobody likes a woman who's stout and strong...

Disney movie merch has been baffling to me since at least when Finding Dory came out and they had somehow not created anything at all that featured Baby Dory. Whatever group is responsible for identifying the marketable elements of their properties misses the mark far too often.

 

[LittleBuford]

Anecdotal, but worth sharing:

My partner and I were in the Emporium last night, and he overheard a group of CMs discussing Wish. One of them was comparing Star to his Nintendo counterpart; none of them had actually watched the movie. These were young, “diverse” people, and at least one of them was a gay man. While significant, their having not seen the film clearly has nothing to do with an ideological objection to Disney.

 

[_caleb]

It is almost as if there was some amount of Disney’s existing global fan base and parental loyalty that is acceptable collateral damage in their quest for social enlightenment.

This is what I've been saying for a while now. The fans who are no longer the center of Disney's focus aren't happy about it. But "social enlightenment" isn't the quest, it's "engagement with a broader audience who will be reliable customers in the long term."

I don't think Wish was made for the demographic many posters here think they fit into.

So that leaves you with two options: There is some new, untapped market of people to replace those that you knowingly pushed away from your brand or you are comfortable with a much smaller (and “evolved”) global audience.

It seems like you're really close to getting it. Just let go of everything you fear to lose and use the Force!

It's not a more "evolved" audience, but deeper (and more loyal) segments of the audience. Once Disney gets legacy folks to stop thinking of themselves as representative of Disney's general audience base and settle into any of the fandoms Disney's catering to with their content and marketing, Disney+ will be in a much better place financially.

From the box office, brand polls, cultural chatter/zeitgeist, etc. there does not seem to be any evidence that the “replacement” audience is responding to these actions.

The "replacement audience" includes many in the legacy audience, and they're all subscribing to Disney+, where they will watch Wish, Lightyear, Dance Moms, or The Curse of Oak Island. There's something for every sort of fan (and less and less aimed at "all audiences").

Nor has Disney adjusted their production and marketing budgets to match this more “limited and targeted” global audience.

Not yet, because they're putting all they can into seeding D+ with box-office-level content. They know they need to lower production costs. If they'd only spent $90M on Wish, don't you think a large portion of the audience would have written it off as being a made-for-TV-special?

Hence, a billion dollars in box office losses this year alone with the brand reeling to find its footing and its new position in the marketplace.

In 3 years, Disney has built the largest streaming platform on the market and positioned itself to be ahead of the trend as consumers continue to cut cable, watch on devices, and stream at home. I imagine they think the long-term survival of their studio is worth $1B or so.

 

[brideck]

I agree that I don't think the trailer for Wish was very informative at all. I was always going to see it (I see 100+ movies in the theater every year), but I don't know what the hook was supposed to be. They keep making movies that could really appeal to the Disney channel/tween demo on some level ("I'm a young girl -- I can make change in the world"), but seem really reticent to try to market movies to that group.

I'm actually going to recant a bit here. What I state is true of the first (teaser) trailer. The second one (from late September) actually shows way too much of the movie, but certainly establishes much more of the world and plot. The catch being that I hadn't actually seen that trailer before going out to watch it just now, and it still doesn't really provide a hook -- just a book report of most of the movie.

I think the movie's biggest, most fundamental problem is misusing the term Wish. It is 100% swapped in where Dream would be the more appropriate word in common usage, and that only serves to muddle things for anyone who can't readily and consistently make that swap in their head every time the word is uttered in the movie/marketing.

 

[Miss Rori]

I didn't even know Wonka was a musical until this week, so if it succeeds it won't be because of good marketing. I like Timothee Chalamet as much as the next guy, but the first trailer really didn't excite me at all.

It has been vanishingly rare for non-animated musicals to admit they're musicals in the advertising in the past 15-20 years, so that's nothing new. Even Les Miserables was coy about it, as was Into the Woods. And given that one of the few exceptions to this was Cats, can you blame them?

I agree that the Wonka trailers didn't inspire confidence! Ironically, the songs can now be listened to on YouTube, and having checked out the two villain numbers from the early going ("Scrub Scrub" and "Sweet Tooth") they're already running rings around the Wish numbers and made me way more interested. But I'm not surprised WB decided to lean on the IP here, rather than the fine details, to promote it. If anything that will probably help word of mouth; the first group through the door gets a pleasant surprise, and notes that to their friends and colleagues and what have you.

Disney movie merch has been baffling to me since at least when Finding Dory came out and they had somehow not created anything at all that featured Baby Dory. Whatever group is responsible for identifying the marketable elements of their properties misses the mark far too often.

After 20+ years of Princess Princess Princess they're in a bit of a rut. And they've often had trouble seeing the merch potential in Pixar films especially, Cars and Toy Story aside.

 

[DKampy]

Lightyear - Woke/ Bad Movie*
Strange World - Woke/ Bad Movie
Elemental - Woke Light/ Good Movie
Wish- Woke Light/ Decent Movie**

As you can see above if a movie is good AND also not woke it has the best chance for success


*based on Gazillion dollar Toy Story franchise

** movie didn’t have a chance due to compounding loss of trust/faith

Please explain how Lightyear and wish are woke….just having a side character that is gay is not woke… most of us have someone who is gay in our lives… rather it be a friend, co-worker, family member etc…you probably do too even if they have not outed themselves to you

My old boss who leaned to a certain side would complain that all of sudden people are gay just to be trendy… no your wrong… they have always been here… a lot more individuals feel safer coming out these days as they have more support then ever before… despite what certain loud groups would like you to believe… polls show people are becoming more tolerant not less… my old boss lost his job for being to in your face to clients with his beliefs

 

[Miss Rori]

I'm actually going to recant a bit here. What I state is true of the first (teaser) trailer. The second one (from late September) actually shows way too much of the movie, but certainly establishes much more of the world and plot. The catch being that I hadn't actually seen that trailer before going out to watch it just now, and it still doesn't really provide a hook -- just a book report of most of the movie.

Point taken and well-stated.

I think the movie's biggest, most fundamental problem is misusing the term Wish. It is 100% swapped in where Dream would be the more appropriate word in common usage, and that only serves to muddle things for anyone who can't readily and consistently make that swap in their head every time the word is uttered in the movie/marketing.

As Bilge Ebiri said in his scathing Vulture review, and was delightfully quoted in Josh Spiegel's takedown in the That Still Small Voice newsletter, “Has anybody involved in the making of Wish had an actual wish ever?” So many critics could not get their heads around the weird terminology and logic gaps (Sample questions: Won't they have the same "wish" again if it's that important? How much of their memory has to be erased so they can't think of it at all? etc.). As Spiegel put it, most of the "wishes" are easily achievable! This just makes the populace of Rosas look lazy and stupid, gambling away something so important to themselves that...they never tried to achieve it on their own. And as the AV Club review says, "everybody dreams Disney" - none of the whims are vaguely selfish or dangerous, so Magnifico looks dumb for being wary of them. And they give them up voluntarily, and know only 12 or so are granted in a year, so why is Asha so upset all of a sudden? She knows this! She sings about it! (The Alternate Ending review goes into more about that and how dumb the characters are in general, but with much harsher language.)

(I have my own cynical theory here: Disney corporate wants to confuse kids over what wishes and dreams are so that when their poor parents tell them no, money's tight, we can't get you that giant Lego set/Disney World vacation/Disney+ subscription the kids will tell them that they're being mean by denying them something so "meaningful".)

 

[mickEblu]

You don't need to say it. Having it be the only topic that you consistently engage with in this thread shows how you feel about the matter. If you think there are other factors, please share those thoughts.

Care to educate me on the difference between woke and woke-ish? I loved Elemental and it is hands-down the most diverse movie that Pixar has ever made. People may not have noticed because they were dressed up like fire or water, but there's racial diversity (truly the movie is largely about race), a strong female lead, and a weepy empath as the main male character.

Woke-ish or Woke Light is something that isn’t full blown woke but has elements or gratuitous scenes that may be perceived as woke especially during a culture war and considering Disneys recent track record.

In regards to Elemental id say the main character being introduced to his nieces girlfriend qualifies as well as the associated backstory of her being non binary. For these two reasons I was hesitant to label Elemental as Non Woke. However, when it comes to the audience at large I believe the majority (including those who have an issue with Disneys recent films like Lightyear or Strange World) do not have a big issue with this as they barely qualify as side characters and if you sneezed you missed it. And I doubt many people know about the backstory. As far as the immigration stuff I doubt many people view that as woke/ DEI or anything of the sort. As far as the latest depiction of a dumb or weak man, I think the audience has grown numb to that.

Remember, it’s what some of the audience perceives as woke. Not whether it really is that matters. Besides, people have different definitions of what woke means. To keep things simple on my little diagram a few posts ago I used the term “woke.” But people get caught up on words like “woke” or “agenda.” So how about let’s just say things that some of the audience doesn’t feel comfortable taking their kids to see in PG animated Disney movies.

 

[mickEblu]

Please explain how Lightyear and wish are woke….just having a side character that is gay is not woke… most of us have someone who is gay in our lives… rather it be a friend, co-worker, family member etc…you probably do too even if they have not outed themselves to you

My old boss who leaned to a certain side would complain that all of sudden people are gay just to be trendy… no your wrong… they have always been here… a lot more individuals feel safer coming out these days as they have more support then ever before… despite what certain loud groups would like you to believe… polls show people are becoming more tolerant not less… my old boss lost his job for being to in your face to clients with his beliefs

It’s Woke to the audience that’s not showing up to the movies. I know how the word “woke” originated and it doesn’t have the same connotation to everyone anymore.

Two women kissing and getting artificially inseminated in space is woke to the people not showing up to the movies and if you don’t understand this I hope you don’t have friends working at Disney or they re doomed.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

And they give them up voluntarily, and know only 12 or so are granted in a year, so why is Asha so upset all of a sudden? She knows this! She sings about it! (The Alternate Ending review goes into more about that and how dumb the characters are in general, but with much harsher language.)

Thank you! This was one of the issues I couldn't wrap my head around in the film: where was the deception? They all willingly gave up their 'wishes' in a public ceremony at age 18 and Magnifico granted the select few wishes that did get granted in equally public ceremonies. Maybe they didn't realise quite how much they were giving up in exchange for the positive aspects of living in Rosas, but none of it seemed particularly hidden from them. All Asha really uncovered was Magnifico's decision-making process... and he also willingly shared that with her!

(I have my own cynical theory here: Disney corporate wants to confuse kids over what wishes and dreams are so that when their poor parents tell them no, money's tight, we can't get you that giant Lego set/Disney World vacation/Disney+ subscription the kids will tell them that they're being mean by denying them something so "meaningful".)

 

[Disney Irish]

Thank you! This was one of the issues I couldn't wrap my head around in the film: where was the deception? They all willingly gave up their 'wishes' in a public ceremony at age 18 and Magnifico granted the select few wishes that did get granted in equally public ceremonies. Maybe they didn't realise quite how much they were giving up in exchange for the positive aspects of living in Rosas, but none of it seemed particularly hidden from them. All Asha really uncovered was Magnifico's decision-making process... and he also willingly shared that with her!

My take away was, would they be willing to give up their wish, their dream, ie their identity and what drives them, if they knew that Magnifico was only granting the wishes he deemed worthy that ultimately keeps him in power, ie almost none are worthy and will never be granted.

This was the idea behind showing Asha's grandfather's wish, that Magnifico deemed it not worthy simply because it could potential topple his rule.

So the deception was that Magnifico doesn't tell them the stakes of him taking their wish nor the likelihood that it'll almost certainly never be granted, ie giving false hope but yet taking an important part of their personality.

 

[brideck]

My take away was, would they be willing to give up their wish, their dream, ie their identity and what drives them, if they knew that Magnifico was only granting the wishes he deemed worthy that ultimately keeps him in power, ie almost none are worthy and will never be granted.

This was the idea behind showing Asha's grandfather's wish, that Magnifico deemed it not worthy simply because it could potential topple his rule.

So the deception was that Magnifico doesn't tell them the stakes of him taking their wish nor the likelihood that it'll almost certainly never be granted, ie giving false hope but yet taking an important part of their personality.

This. For the movie to work, we have to accept that for whatever reason the citizens of Rosas feel as though they can't achieve these things on their own. And that would probably be a common feeling in a society where no one actually appears to do much of anything interesting.

So the deal is supposed to be that they'll give it to Magnifico with the hope that they will be randomly rewarded with it later -- essentially playing the lottery. But would so many people play the lottery if they knew with 100% certainty that they could not win. More so, how would they feel about the person who was judging them and then determining that they were not allowed to win.

I realized that the wish/dream confusion is even worse than I originally stated. Asha certainly does mean wish, in the common sense, when she sings her song and wishes on the star. But in the context of Magnifico and his orbs, they should have changed all of that to dreams. Having two conflicting usages of the same word is nigh unforgivable. I have to believe that there's at least one story person who's really sad that they lost a battle about that.

 

[DKampy]

It’s Woke to the audience that’s not showing up to the movies. I know how the word “woke” originated and it doesn’t have the same connotation to everyone anymore.

Two women kissing and getting artificially inseminated in space is woke to the people not showing up to the movies and if you don’t understand this I hope you don’t have friends working at Disney or they re doomed.

Yet Barbie is the most woke film of the year… I would also argue Elemental is more woke then Lightyear… yet people enjoy both of those… so you can stand against the Woke… the rest of us will move forward

 

[mickEblu]

Yet Barbie is the most woke film of the year… I would also argue Elemental is more woke then Lightyear… yet people enjoy both of those… so you can stand against the Woke… the rest of us will move forward

Please define forward. Poor word choice considering Disney is losing a ton of money.

I didn’t see Barbie. But I do know it’s not an animated PG Disney movie. Not the same audience. People have, or at least had, certain expectations from Disney.

 

[mickEblu]

Besides, About Time was Prime Margot Robbie.