Disney could sell Lucasfilm ?

[Psab keel]

What about the thousands of fairy tales and myths from cultures that are lesser known on the world stage? What about African, Arabic, Chinese, Finnish, or any other culture? Instead of race swapping, gender swapping European cultures cast of fairytale characters, tell me about the stories that are known in some of the countries I listed above instead of telling me, yet another version of Snow White? While you're at it, cast people from the above mentioned countries in the roles too. This way you get new stories and a diverse cast to represent their culture. We'd get all kinds of new, fresh stories to enjoy and we can learn about other cultures in the process! What a novel idea!

But nope! Brand recognition is more important. And people wonder why so many fans openly mock Disney's ass backwards idea of representation and diversity. Hollywood in general is terrible at this too. They don't actually believe in these ideals. They're only backing them to sell you a product. If they actually cared about diversity we would see more stories from lesser known cultures and casts of newcomers from other places in the world.

When I read The Hero with a Thousand Faces over twenty years ago now, the myths I remember Campbell recounting were from cultures I knew nothing about. It was engaging and educational to widen my knowledge about different places and people. Any one of the stories he told in his many works could be the basis to find new and exciting heroes to follow.

I suspect most studio heads don't know how to read anymore though...

 

[Solo4114]

Although the MCU consists of tons of movies, the MCU story is basically the Avengers vs Thanos with the other movies basically being side-content/the appendices to fill in the backstory of what other characters were doing. Now that Thanos is dead and the OG Avengers disbanded, the story has effectively ended which is why everything in Phase 4 and 5 are so lacking imo.

I think it's a little more complicated than that.

I think Phase 4 and 5 are suffering from a few different factors.

1. Some fans are being resistant to the introduction of new characters. They miss the old gang and want 'em back.

2. Especially coming off of Phase 3/Endgame, Phase 4 felt unfocused and like it had no unifying concept to it. It was just a collection of one-off movies that didn't seem to be building towards anything specific. For better or worse, audiences have become trained to accept the main story of the film, but be constantly waiting for that end credit hint at what's coming next and what we're building towards. With Phase 1, it was the formation of the Avengers. Everyone knew it, everyone could see it, everyone knew it'd be big. With Phase 2, it was a much more mixed bag. The films ranged from AMAZING (e.g. The Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy 1) to decidedly "Meh." (Iron Man 3, Thor 2, and frankly I'd put Age of Ultron in there, too). Phase 2, as a phase unto itself, wasn't really building towards anything. Age of Ultron didn't feel like the natural progression of the developments of Phase 2. It felt more like "We have to do another Avengers movie, so here it is." BUT, we'd seen Thanos, so everyone who knew comics knew we were headed towards an Infinity Gauntlet confrontation of some kind. Phase 3 was the culmination of that, and it was epic. But Phase 4? What's it about? Nobody knows. The post-credit sequences seem unrelated, and just kinda there. And that's kind of how all of Phase 4 seems.

3. Phase 4 was also the first phase to really delve into expanding it via television. Phase 2 and 3 had some tangential connections to Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter, but Agent Carter was only very distantly related, and Agents of SHIELD always felt subservient to the main cinematic approach. With Phase 4, you had big-budget productions furthering the story (but which, again, felt unconnected) introducing more characters, and doing so in a much different format. I think the shift in format (a) required people to have Disney+ to access the new material, and (b) was jarring to some audiences. It's not the bite-sized chunk that a movie is. The most significant of these, though, was Loki, which introduced Kang and the multiverse, and which (I thought) set the stage for what the big confrontation will probably be at the end of Phase 5.

4. With Phase 5, the trend of television and film both supporting the phase more directly continued, and I think continued to be confusing for people. BUT, we now at least kinda sorta have a direction. The thing is, the Kang storyline is harder for people to get a handle on than the Thanos one. Partially that's because Kang is an inherently more confusing "character." (Because he's more than just one character.) But partially it's because I think Kang as a threat is simply less well known. I haven't followed the comics closely, but I think the main storylines about Kang hit more in the 80s than the 90s. As a result, the target audience for these films is way less familiar with Kang as a threat, and with the storyline to kind of guess where things are headed, and so it all again feels a bit unfocused.

5. Then there's the whole thing from Phase 4 with the Eternals and hints at really ramping up the magical side of things for Marvel with Moon Knight, Wandavision, and Werewolf by Night. I don't think anyone has any sense of where that's all headed. Unless the Celestials end up being the Big Bads for Phase 6, I don't see how the Eternals fits in at all with any of the other films. Right now, it feels like a totally separate story that has been largely ignored, kinda like how the Inhumans TV show was basically memory-holed altogether. Likewise, the magical stuff just feels like "Oh, by the way, it's not just Doctor Strange. There's all kinds of magic in this universe" and...um....that's it. Just a friendly reminder, folks!


Overall, I've continued to enjoy all of the material Marvel has put out for these two phases, but I think they are feeling less focused to audiences, and the spectacle of Marvel films just isn't a draw by itself the way it was 10 years ago. It's not about "bad stories." It's about "We have no idea where this is going, and frankly none of it is all that special anymore." Audiences are kinda spoiled now. Back in the day, superhero movies were rare things, and a big damn deal. Now? Meh, they're like busses. You miss one, another will be along shortly. And the two new phases haven't done enough to make themselves feel special by feeling like there's something bigger going on.

 

[Cadeus]

 

[bwayne64]

Disney is like a child who starts exhibiting self destructive tendencies. There are adults who try to tell them how they are hurting themselves, and even how to course correct. The child doesn't listen and continues in their self harm. The adults just want what's best for the child but is increasingly frustrated by the petulance and pushback. Surely with the parents, all the teachers, and many responsible people explaining the problem, they should see what's best for them. The child insists that they know best and that all these people are just old fashioned and even bigoted. They're living in the past and just don't understand the new way of thinking and acting. Eventually the teachers give up. Then assorted others, finally even the parents. The child goes on to self destruction and failure. If they had listened to those older and wiser, or just those with common sense, they could have been successful and happy. But some people just can't listen to those around them. They have to learn the hard way, If at all. Some never learn.

 

[HeartBlade]

I think it's a little more complicated than that.

I think Phase 4 and 5 are suffering from a few different factors.

1. Some fans are being resistant to the introduction of new characters. They miss the old gang and want 'em back.

2. Especially coming off of Phase 3/Endgame, Phase 4 felt unfocused and like it had no unifying concept to it. It was just a collection of one-off movies that didn't seem to be building towards anything specific. For better or worse, audiences have become trained to accept the main story of the film, but be constantly waiting for that end credit hint at what's coming next and what we're building towards. With Phase 1, it was the formation of the Avengers. Everyone knew it, everyone could see it, everyone knew it'd be big. With Phase 2, it was a much more mixed bag. The films ranged from AMAZING (e.g. The Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy 1) to decidedly "Meh." (Iron Man 3, Thor 2, and frankly I'd put Age of Ultron in there, too). Phase 2, as a phase unto itself, wasn't really building towards anything. Age of Ultron didn't feel like the natural progression of the developments of Phase 2. It felt more like "We have to do another Avengers movie, so here it is." BUT, we'd seen Thanos, so everyone who knew comics knew we were headed towards an Infinity Gauntlet confrontation of some kind. Phase 3 was the culmination of that, and it was epic. But Phase 4? What's it about? Nobody knows. The post-credit sequences seem unrelated, and just kinda there. And that's kind of how all of Phase 4 seems.

3. Phase 4 was also the first phase to really delve into expanding it via television. Phase 2 and 3 had some tangential connections to Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter, but Agent Carter was only very distantly related, and Agents of SHIELD always felt subservient to the main cinematic approach. With Phase 4, you had big-budget productions furthering the story (but which, again, felt unconnected) introducing more characters, and doing so in a much different format. I think the shift in format (a) required people to have Disney+ to access the new material, and (b) was jarring to some audiences. It's not the bite-sized chunk that a movie is. The most significant of these, though, was Loki, which introduced Kang and the multiverse, and which (I thought) set the stage for what the big confrontation will probably be at the end of Phase 5.

4. With Phase 5, the trend of television and film both supporting the phase more directly continued, and I think continued to be confusing for people. BUT, we now at least kinda sorta have a direction. The thing is, the Kang storyline is harder for people to get a handle on than the Thanos one. Partially that's because Kang is an inherently more confusing "character." (Because he's more than just one character.) But partially it's because I think Kang as a threat is simply less well known. I haven't followed the comics closely, but I think the main storylines about Kang hit more in the 80s than the 90s. As a result, the target audience for these films is way less familiar with Kang as a threat, and with the storyline to kind of guess where things are headed, and so it all again feels a bit unfocused.

5. Then there's the whole thing from Phase 4 with the Eternals and hints at really ramping up the magical side of things for Marvel with Moon Knight, Wandavision, and Werewolf by Night. I don't think anyone has any sense of where that's all headed. Unless the Celestials end up being the Big Bads for Phase 6, I don't see how the Eternals fits in at all with any of the other films. Right now, it feels like a totally separate story that has been largely ignored, kinda like how the Inhumans TV show was basically memory-holed altogether. Likewise, the magical stuff just feels like "Oh, by the way, it's not just Doctor Strange. There's all kinds of magic in this universe" and...um....that's it. Just a friendly reminder, folks!


Overall, I've continued to enjoy all of the material Marvel has put out for these two phases, but I think they are feeling less focused to audiences, and the spectacle of Marvel films just isn't a draw by itself the way it was 10 years ago. It's not about "bad stories." It's about "We have no idea where this is going, and frankly none of it is all that special anymore." Audiences are kinda spoiled now. Back in the day, superhero movies were rare things, and a big damn deal. Now? Meh, they're like busses. You miss one, another will be along shortly. And the two new phases haven't done enough to make themselves feel special by feeling like there's something bigger going on.

Your points 1 and 2 dont really oppose my narrative. People want the “old gang” back because they were the main characters they fell in love with. You see them grow, develop, and finally reach the climax of their respective stories and now that it has ended, it feels the story has ended; hence why phase 4 seems very unfocused.

Regarding 3 and 4, the expansion to tv aka other media than the main is a stupid mistake corporations love to continuously make. The obvious idea was people love the MCU. Lets put exclusive and critical content in our tv shows only available on D+ and people will buy subscriptions to watch. The MCU was already too complex as is with 23 movies just in phases 1 to 3 with an implication that you need to watch all to understand the story. I do think Disney overestimated how many hardcore fans there are, especially around the world where some people were reluctant because they didnt know how to get into the franchise by late phase 2. Add in “homework” in the form of watching tv shows and you just alienate the casual audience further (same thing with Final Fantasy XV which had a tv show, movie, and book to fill the story which resulted in people just not looking into it and saying the story was *****).

And adding on to 5, I do think people are just sick of superhero movies in general. As you mentioned, superhero movies used to be rare with the only known ones being Batman, Superman, Spiderman, and X-men. Yes Blade was awesome but it wasnt really pitched as a superhero movie. Now, we are inundated with superhero movies and it gets boring. People want something new. I wouldnt be surprised if people were bored by early phase 3 but hung on until Endgame where the story finally “ended.” Even if phase 4 and 5 were masterpieces, I do think there would have been a drop off because people were just sick and wanted something new.

If Disney were smart, they would have saved Star Wars for here. Let superheroes rest for a while and move to adventure/sci-fi. Then follow that up with something different again like horror new fairy tales. After the superhero fatigue is gone, soft reboot with phase 4 with the new cast that audiences can get introduced to (and make them much more distinct than the previous cast. No ironheart as female ironman or she hulk as female hulk or Bishop as female Hawkeye. Have different female superheroes that are very different like X-23, squirrel girl, Jubilie, storm, etc.).

 

[ScourgiousJinx]

They have to learn the hard way, If at all. Some never learn.

Exactly. The only way Disney will learn is to repeatedly fail until they can't anymore. So let them continue to be their own worst enemy.

Wise parents know when to stop criticizing the child and/or to switch tactics when what they're doing isn't changing anything or is making the situation worse. Eventually they may realize they have done all they can do. Wise parents know when the only things left are patience and taking a huge step back because the rest is up to the child.

 

[Solo4114]

Regarding 3 and 4, the expansion to tv aka other media than the main is a stupid mistake corporations love to continuously make. The obvious idea was people love the MCU. Lets put exclusive and critical content in our tv shows only available on D+ and people will buy subscriptions to watch. The MCU was already too complex as is with 23 movies just in phases 1 to 3 with an implication that you need to watch all to understand the story. I do think Disney overestimated how many hardcore fans there are, especially around the world where some people were reluctant because they didnt know how to get into the franchise by late phase 2. Add in “homework” in the form of watching tv shows and you just alienate the casual audience further (same thing with Final Fantasy XV which had a tv show, movie, and book to fill the story which resulted in people just not looking into it and saying the story was *****).

I actually don't think that the Marvel TV shows were necessary to watch. They help introduce characters, but thus far, that's all they've done. I mean, I've found them highly entertaining overall, but they haven't had any impact on the MCU, really. Falcon & Winter Soldier kinda sorta did, and I guess Hawkeye did a bit, but the rest? Just a character intro. Nothing critical to some overarching plot...because there wasn't an overarching plot, really. Doctor Strange 2 actually totally ignored Wandavision, and I think did so to its detriment. I enjoyed the film for what it was, but I was disappointed that it didn't incorporate much of what happened in the show. Only Loki really introduced the multiverse concept and brought Kang into play.

Mostly I just think the shows have contributed to the feeling about Phases 4 and 5 being "all sound and fury, signifying nothing." They're big, and exciting, and full of adventure, and....so what? If you missed 'em, don't sweat it. There's another movie coming soon.

And adding on to 5, I do think people are just sick of superhero movies in general. As you mentioned, superhero movies used to be rare with the only known ones being Batman, Superman, Spiderman, and X-men. Yes Blade was awesome but it wasnt really pitched as a superhero movie. Now, we are inundated with superhero movies and it gets boring. People want something new. I wouldnt be surprised if people were bored by early phase 3 but hung on until Endgame where the story finally “ended.” Even if phase 4 and 5 were masterpieces, I do think there would have been a drop off because people were just sick and wanted something new.

I think this gets into the fatigue. It's not "superhero fatigue" per se. It's that being a superhero movie alone isn't enough anymore, and for a while there, it really was. Follow the formula, make bank. It really did work for a while there, even with some fairly mediocre films (that people seem to forget until you mention them by name). Like, Phase 1 and 2 weren't all universally fantastic. We can all point to several -- probably about 1/3 of the total amount -- that were "fair to middling" at best.

If Disney were smart, they would have saved Star Wars for here. Let superheroes rest for a while and move to adventure/sci-fi. Then follow that up with something different again like horror new fairy tales. After the superhero fatigue is gone, soft reboot with phase 4 with the new cast that audiences can get introduced to (and make them much more distinct than the previous cast. No ironheart as female ironman or she hulk as female hulk or Bishop as female Hawkeye. Have different female superheroes that are very different like X-23, squirrel girl, Jubilie, storm, etc.).

Part of the problem, though, is that Disney and Marvel and LFL and Pixar are all each independent studios, vying for the same total pool of money, and competing with each other to justify their continued existence, even if they're owned by the same overall entity. You could try to coordinate between them, but there's only so much time on the calendar, and so many films you can release at a go.

And meanwhile, the investors demand profit. If you aren't actively making more money, and more than you did before, why should they invest in you? They're not there because they agree with some overall vision. They're there to extract profit, grow the money they invest, and move on when things look shaky. Thus, the only way to keep going is to keep making content to sell, and to always be making more of it so that you can always be making more money than you did yesterday.

The investor class doesn't care that this is a short-sighted approach that ultimately destroys whatever it touches. They're strip-mining or clear-cutting forests. They aren't there to create sustainable growth. They're there to get all the resources they can until there's nothing left to get, and then they'll move on to the next place to park and grow their money.

 

[Prop Collector]

Bob Iger Shifts From Building an Empire to a Disney Yard Sale
Where is everyone? Disney's theme parks are shockingly empty this summer
Disney Stock Hits Lowest Close of 2023. It’s Nearing a 52-Week Low
Disney pulling back on making Marvel, Star Wars content, Iger says

 

[Laspector]

I didn't think Dr. Strange2 ignored WandaVision at all. In fact, I think it worked right well with it.

 

[Psab keel]

Bob Iger Shifts From Building an Empire to a Disney Yard Sale
Where is everyone? Disney's theme parks are shockingly empty this summer
Disney Stock Hits Lowest Close of 2023. It’s Nearing a 52-Week Low
Disney pulling back on making Marvel, Star Wars content, Iger says



View attachment 1720275

As a dear friend of mine likes to say, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

This is the result of relying on legacy brands and not developing new IP's with talented writers. For all the short term gains they made, now they'll be lucky to retain all of the acquisitions they made in the last decade or more. That's the problem though. They're an acquisition company more than an entertainment company. I know shareholder demands, blah, blah, blah, but if you're living from financial quarter to quarter with no steps to implement sustainable content, one of their main sources of revenue, then this is what happens. Don't even get me started on the cost of the theme parks.

At least with Lucasfilm, that well is about dry, and what's left is essentially contaminated water that few want to drink. Couple this all happening during the writer's/ actor's strike and you have Iger making tone deaf comments about their demands being unrealistic. Disney will be lucky to even hire talent after this is all over as they sell off chunks of their brand to stop the hemorraging.

At this point it's more an interesting study into how big businesses think their size alone can save them. Money can't insulate you from bad decisions forever. Then you've got the studio heads (ie. braindead idiots) that want to use AI to replace their entire infrastructure. And people thought Skynet was the stuff of fiction...

 

[Sluis Van Shipyards]

I think Disney/Lucasfilm is ready to die on the hill they're on and won't change course. They've repeatedly shown that by blaming fans (even with this new Indy movie) when what they make falls flat on its face.

 

[Cephus]

I think Disney/Lucasfilm is ready to die on the hill they're on and won't change course. They've repeatedly shown that by blaming fans (even with this new Indy movie) when what they make falls flat on its face.

Then the stockholders will stop them. Ultimately, they only have so much rope to hang themselves with before they get tossed out on their ear.

 

[Solo4114]

I think you guys misunderstand what's going on here.

The stockholders won't protect against this. The stockholders just want ever-growing returns, and if they aren't getting it, either they'll take their money elsewhere, or Iger will be replaced.

It's also worth noting that all the studios are headed into Q2 earnings calls over the next couple of weeks and have to deal with the fallout of the writers and actors strikes.

I think the real issue here isn't that these brands don't make money. Rather it's that the brands aren't making enough money given the expenses involved in making new content. And that's "enough" money from the investors' standpoint, not from any objectively reasonable standpoint.

Star Wars is still a perfectly resilient, valuable brand. Indy far less so, but there are ways to make money from that brand, too, that don't involve dropping $300M on making a tentpole film.

And none of this has sod all to do with pissing off the fans; the fans have never been the way these brands make money. If ONLY the hardcore fans watch something, then ok, I can see where you'd want to appease them (even though that seems like a fool's errand to me). But the strength of the Star Wars brand has always been its mainstream appeal, and that's who the studios and investors have thought they were selling to.

Look, the real issue here from a financial perspective -- and the reason why you're seeing all of this upheaval within the industry -- is that (1) there is a constant drive to wring more and more profits from the system, and (2) that leaves execs looking for ways to increase profit margins all the time. But there's an upper limit to how to increase your profit margins. You can't increase them past a certain point; you can maintain them, though, potentially. Except that even that is...unpredictable. And that's the core issue here.

The market relies on stability, reliability, and especially predictability. Everyone wants both a safe bet and a bet that will always make you more money. You saw this in the housing bubble in the late 2000s, you saw it in the dot com bubble in the early 2000s, and it's always the same damn story. Investors want a thing that they know will always make them more money. When I was looking to buy a place around 2007, I remember a realtor telling me "Well, real estate always appreciates about 20% a year." And I thought to myself, "Bull****." But it also underscored the notion of home buying around that time, and which led to investments in that sector. It wasn't enough to just buy a property for one price, and be able to sell it for a higher price. No, the reason the money concentrated there was that the rate of increase year over year was so high.

Entertainment had been, prior to the pandemic, pretty reliable...until it wasn't. And now it's not, and that leaves the execs scrambling to figure out ways to shift back into profit-building. It's not about the "strength of the brand" necessarily, although that's part of it. It's also about their belief in the ability to exploit the brand in a predictable, easily replicable way.

 

[joberg]

Fear and Greed; the 2 main staples of the Stock Market...also in investments

 

[joberg]

 

[Prop Collector]

It's good they replaced the 7 dwarves with the ugliest ensemble in Hollywood history.

Remember how offended everyone was by these dwarves?

 

[Usagi Pilgrim]

Here's what's REALLY going on...

LOL

 

[janglesworthy]

I celebrate this. Go harder I say, and for sure spend at least 700 million on this.

 

[batguy]

And none of this has sod off to do with pissing off the fans.

Disagree. The fanbois are the sharp point of the spear on a lot of these issues. The whole spear is there behind it.

Disney's stock price isn't in the toilet because a handful of Doomcock fans boycotted Indy#5. The corp's recent stuff is not appealing to the masses like it should either.

For every one fan posting up angry rants about Disney going woke, there are dozens of other normies who didn't see Disney's latest movie because "Meh." In the early 1990s those people weren't saying "Meh", they were in the theaters & video stores.


The Doomcock fans and bored normies are having different reactions to various symptoms of the same problem - Disney is selling crap.

It's not a consistency problem. They are consistently making crap. Their theater movies are bombing because the public guesses it will be crap without seeing it. Disney cannot even make TV commercials & trailers that fool the public anymore. That's because their movies aren't just occasional misfires from creative filmmakers. Their work is coming from untalented people at the core. The editors cannot even cherry-pick short clips of it that look misleadingly good.

The Hallmark Channel makes crap too. But they have enough sense to do the math and figure out what's financially viable. They make low-selling crap at even lower budgets and it works for them. But Disney keeps trying to make crap for the non-crap market. That's not gonna work.

 

[Solo4114]

Disagree. The fanbois are the sharp point of the spear on a lot of these issues. The whole spear is there behind it.

Disney's stock price isn't in the toilet because a handful of Doomcock fans boycotted Indy#5. The corp's recent stuff is not appealing to the masses like it should either.

For every one fan posting up angry rants about Disney going woke, there are dozens of other normies who didn't see Disney's latest movie because "Meh." In the early 1990s those people weren't saying "Meh", they were in the theaters & video stores.

The Doomcock fans and bored normies are having different reactions to various symptoms of the same problem - Disney is trying to sell creative art that doesn't have any creative art in it.

My point is that some folks here like to paint it as if the real problem is that Disney has pissed off the fans. And I don't think that's the problem.

As you said, the real problem is the normies are saying "Meh" and not showing up.

The source of the problem may be what you say (i.e., Disney's stuff isn't creative nor artistic), but I think it's probably more that audiences just...aren't that excited for yet another Marvel film, and have no connection to Indy the way they used to.

As for Star Wars...we haven't had a Star Wars film at all since The Rise of Skywalker, so I don't think we have a good barometer for how/whether normies are liking the franchise on the big screen. I don't know that Disney+ releases viewing numbers (I'd bet they don't), but it certainly doesn't seem like they've slowed down in making Star Wars TV content, what with Ahsoka coming out soon.

I think this is more about other aspects of the industry/business that are pressuring it.

Like, I don't think Indy 5 gets greenlit under normal circumstances. I think someone in the room says "Are you high? Harrison Ford is ****ing 80 years old. How stupid are you?!" But the pressure to produce megahits from big brands that are marketable the world over leads people to believe that Indy is such a brand. Evidently...it is not.