quote:

Originally posted by Ted Dastick Jr.:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
There are too many MCU TV shows and they have now turned to second and third tier characters that only true Marvel readers know. Is it reasonable to expect that general TV viewers will become obsessed by characters they never heard about?

Why did people give Guardians of the Galaxy a chance, then? Talk about a roster of Marvel D-listers.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
The woke/progressive people at Disney who want to insert social messages into everything don't seem to realize that the parents of middle America that buy the tickets don't share their values.

Have you watched the series? Her character is of Indian descent, it only make sense that their lifestyle is represented accurately. I'm actually finding it an interesting look into a culture I know nothing about (if it is indeed accurate).

To the first point, "Guardians of the Galaxy" opened in 2014 and could be called the catalyst for what followed. A new franchise, with new comic characters, handled in a way other than the gloom of a Dark Knight was welcomed 8 years ago. This was before the mass market streaming of the MCU that would be mined to death, especially during the last 3 pandemic years. Now I don't know who would want to dedicate all their free time to watching MCU offshoots on Disney+, but it seems that they would be missing out on many more important things to do.

To the second point, my parents felt it was good parenting to get me to see all those Disney classics. I find it funny that parents are only now waking up to the messaging of Disney entertainment. I had to sit through "Bambi", "Old Yeller" and "Dumbo" and nobody considered that child abuse.

I did and still do. Stop singing "The Lion King" songs and take a look at that Greek tragedy. Disney has always been sending children to therapy, parents just didn't notice before.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I find it funny that parents are only now waking up to the messaging of Disney entertainment.

The messaging I was referring to was not "Everyone's gonna die, get over it", which has always been a part of Disney, even back when they were beloved and successful.

It was more to do with the same-sex relationships that Disney wants to shove into everything. Which is costing them approval and shareholder value.

Disney used to be a company dedicated to giving families entertainment. Now it's a company devoted to using entertainment as a medium to advance a social message, which alienates a big fraction of the public who isn't interested in hearing that message, at least in the form of a cartoon.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I find it funny that parents are only now waking up to the messaging of Disney entertainment.

The messaging I was referring to was not "Everyone's gonna die, get over it", which has always been a part of Disney, even back when they were beloved and successful.

Yes, I know what you meant, and Disney is still successful and beloved by many, many people who agree with the messaging or don't even know its there. Walt Disney always had an agenda and now the hierarchy of Disney probably even more so, as its evolved over time to include more current social issues. The remedy for those who disagree is in the pocketbook more than anything else and that is up to the individual.

What I was saying is that I hate almost all the Disney classics because they are usually about dead parents, abandoned offspring, or loss of a beloved pet and the "happy" ending is only reached after a tale of misery. This is what we show kids as a life lesson, however we can't say anyone won the baseball game because the losers might feel bad. Everything is screwy, but I still hate Disney.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I find it funny that parents are only now waking up to the messaging of Disney entertainment.

The messaging I was referring to was not "Everyone's gonna die, get over it", which has always been a part of Disney, even back when they were beloved and successful.

It was more to do with the same-sex relationships that Disney wants to shove into everything. Which is costing them approval and shareholder value.

Which is ridiculous and a dated way of looking at the world. Look around, the same-sex relationships they're "shoving" into everything are part of everyday life now. Things that were once taboo or just not the norm are all around us today. Disney's putting out a message of inclusiveness. But Mrs. Jones can't handle the fact that little Timmy might see two women in a relationship.

I could argue Disney is giving MORE families entertainment today, because families don't all look like Leave It To Beaver any more. They're only alienating people that refuse to move forward.

You're right - them including messaging like this certainly alienates ANYONE who disagrees with their inclusion. But to Raven's point, where's all the parental outrage been with the death of one or both parents in nearly every animated feature Disney released? That can weigh WAY heavier emotionally on a child than any kind of loving relationship they show.

quote:

Originally posted by Ted Dastick Jr.:
Disney's putting out a message of inclusiveness. . . .
I could argue Disney is giving MORE families entertainment today

And if you were right, Lightyear would have made more money in its first week than Jurassic World did in its second. But it didn't, because people are tired of being told how they are "refusing to move forward."

quote:

You're right - them including messaging like this certainly alienates ANYONE who disagrees with their inclusion.

And it's stupid for an entertainment company to be knowingly alienating anyone.

(and I understand that since Lightyear is doing so poorly, Disney is cancelling the next movie in the series, Brokeback Woody.)

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Disney is still successful

It's hard to say that a company that's lost half of its market capitalization ($160,000,000,000) in the last nine months is successful.

quote:

quote:
You're right - them including messaging like this certainly alienates ANYONE who disagrees with their inclusion.

And it's stupid for an entertainment company to be knowingly alienating anyone.

This is becoming very close to a political discussion, so the mods might strike this down.

But this is the same argument made about including black people in films and TV not that long ago.

Sorry but same sex couples exist. Showing one for a few seconds in any film does not mean you are being force fed anything.

Ed

There isn't an entertainment project produced that doesn't alienate somebody. The idea is to hopefully connect with enough people so the project ultimately makes money.

I guess I missed the "woke" part of Lightyear as I have only seen the previews. What I did see was a well beloved and developed character be transformed into something completely different. That and spending 200M on an animated project is sounding like a risk that may not pay off.

If I was a kid and had a choice between JP and Lightyear? Yeah...sorry Buzz.

Ms Marvel looks like a superhero version of one of those goofy Disney teen shows. Can't say anything about it attracts my attention. I didn't think that Moon Knight or Hawkeye were all that great either.

In other news both Top Gun Maverick and Dr Strange have plowed well into the $400M domestic box office range. Although I can't say I understand it, Top Gun looks like it will cross $500M before it is done.

Looks like 2022 could end very well for the box office. Films still to be released.

Elvis
Minions
Thor
Nope (thinking another sleeper hit for Peele)
Beast (taking Cujo to a new level)
Halloween Ends (Hopefully)
Black Adam
Black Panther
Avatar
Shazam

Was hoping Borderlands might get released this year but can't find anything official.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Was hoping Borderlands might get released this year but can't find anything official.

I'm looking forward to that one too, but latest rumor I heard was 2023. Not sure if postproduction has even been finished.

Possible delays might also be due to trying to find a good time for it to come out. Roth is supposed to be going for a true video game look in the graphics and I believe "Borderlands" is close to a first shooter game. So if he achieves any realistic viewer perspective, well given what's been going on in the "real" world, that's likely to upset some people too.

You're right. Any entertainment project is bound to alienate somebody, good reason, bad reason or no reason.

I wasn't commenting on gay rights or whether they exist (obviously they have them, and they do). But it's beyond debate at this point that Disney is putting gay couples into their product for social justice reasons, and to move the Overton Window with respect to gayness. Both management and rank-and-file staff have said this is what they are doing. At the same time, their movies are underperforming, and the company is becoming less valuable.

My point is that I think there is a direct correlation here, because people don't want to be preached at when they watch cartoons; and they don't want their kids to be indoctrinated by movies.

If Disney worked on making entertaining movies, instead of implementing social policy, they'd make more money.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
I wasn't commenting on gay rights or whether they exist (obviously they have them, and they do). But it's beyond debate at this point that Disney is putting gay couples into their product for social justice reasons, and to move the Overton Window with respect to gayness. Both management and rank-and-file staff have said this is what they are doing. At the same time, their movies are underperforming, and the company is becoming less valuable.

My point is that I think there is a direct correlation here, because people don't want to be preached at when they watch cartoons; and they don't want their kids to be indoctrinated by movies.

If Disney worked on making entertaining movies, instead of implementing social policy, they'd make more money.

Wow, yes you are commenting on gay rights, right here with this bigoted comment. I applaud Disney for doing something right (for once) and including same sex couples. It's about time for some inclusivity. There is no "indoctrination" per your words. What, you think if a kid sees a Disney movie they will be "tainted" and become gay. Man, that is stupid.

Disney has been pushing the "heterosexual agenda" for so many years (since it began) and shoving it down everyone's faces that it's about time for some equality.

And by the way, the scene you are referring to is not a preach. It is showing the characters just as they are, no preaching nothing. Just characters. Get a grip man. You are totally missing the point.

Mods, sorry for the political stuff but I am truly offended by these comments.

quote:

Originally posted by Jessica:
right here with this bigoted comment.

"Bigoted"? Where did I say anything bad about gay people?
There are some very good dictionaries online, and they are free. You should try one of them out.

quote:

There is no "indoctrination" per your words.

Disney producer Latoya Raveneau has explicitly said that she has a "gay agenda" for Disney Kid's TV, and that she is regularly "adding queerness" wherever she could. Sounds like indoctrination to .

Quick, someone famous who's been on cards die so we can get back to non-sports obituaries!

(I kid, I kid. I don't want anyone to die.)

I'd definitely let this one go, Bill...

"Elvis" opens this weekend. Let's see how it does. Trailers looked pretty good, IMHO

My mom was a teenager when Elvis became famous and she went to one of his concerts. She saw the actor playing him and says he looks nothing like him and refuses to see the movie. Kurt Russell didn't really look like him either but she liked that movie from 1979. I hear the actor did a great job and that it's a good movie.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
"Elvis" opens this weekend. Let's see how it does. Trailers looked pretty good, IMHO

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
"Elvis" opens this weekend. Let's see how it does. Trailers looked pretty good, IMHO

I had no idea there was an Elvis film releasing.

I dunno, I'm thinking Elvis isn't going to get a lot of people into a theatre. Not that it won't be a good movie, just that people who are old enough or are interested enough have already seen or heard everything they can say about Elvis, and a lot of people from younger generations are ambivalent. Maybe it depends on what part of the country you are in, but I can't remember the last time I heard an Elvis song on a radio station here. By contrast Beatles, Stones and even Doors are often played.

The movie was well received at Cannes, but the only big-name actor in a major role is Tom Hanks playing Col. Tom Parker, which will probably take at least some portion of the story off Elvis. Will musical numbers be enough to pull in an audience that could just as well wait for the streaming or DVD? We will see. My own guess is that I really don't see it taking either Lightyear or Jurassic Park by much, if at all. In Memphis, yes.

Ted, here are 2 trailers for Elvis


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBDLRvjHVOY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp2BNHwbwvI

This Elvis movie is another remake basically, but the director has had success by heaping his signature style on several other oft-told tales in the past, namely "Romeo & Juliet", "Moulin Rouge", and "The Great Gatsby". I liked all of those and plan to see this "Elvis" next week. Plus, my mom is a big fan of his, so we'll definitely take her along.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I dunno, I'm thinking Elvis isn't going to get a lot of people into a theatre.

It did however get people all shook up