joberg
Legendary Member
It is possible! You just push the button "Ignore" and be a real leader. Lots of people should view the movie "Fountain Head" with Gary Cooper and Barbara Stanwick and see what I'm talking about.
Disney could sell Lucasfilm ?
- Thread starter bwayne64
- Start date
Disney also invested his OWN money and time to get his dreams off the ground. From the GoBanking Rates website:
In 1952, when Disney began drafting concepts for the theme park, his company was barely scraping in gains, with a net profit of $720,000 on revenues of $7.3 million. Launching a project as ambitious and costly as a theme park was a ludicrous idea and the Disney Board was quick to shun it.
So, Walt Disney formed an entirely new company called WED to power his dream of Disneyland. He borrowed $50,000 — the most allowed — from his life insurance policy to fund Disneyland. He also sold his second house and put his other home in his wife’s name to help avoid losing it should he fall into bankruptcy. Had Disneyland not taken off as a monumental success, it’s likely that Walt Disney would be remembered not as a branding genius and pioneering entrepreneur, but as an artful but overambitious animation filmmaker who, unfortunately, took financial risks that just didn’t pay off.
Who would do that, in today's world? All of these CEOs, executive VP of whatever have golden parachutes , even the fired entertainment heads get royal size payouts when they can't cut the mustard.
cboath
Master Member
Investing in 2000s....every investment should have a guaranteed major payoff. There should be no risk, just ever increasing profits. That's how they seem to all think these days. And even when something turns a profit on it's investment, it then is 'not good enough', it has to be MORE. then more and more. Steady stream of income is considered a failed investment.
You're wondering why movies are made without original ideas, etc? Just go back 40 years. It'd be over a year after release before a movie would hit the rental market. You could buy them, sure...for like 70 bucks, and that was the mid 80's. They didn't go right to 30 dollar retail until they'd been at rental a good while and it was nearly a year after that to hit HBO. I vaguely remember it being a big deal when Star Wars hit HBO and that was the mid 80's IIRC. Jump to mid/late 90's and it home video and rental were pretty much the same time, but it was closer to 9 months after release. HBO was 12-18 months. Up until at least 2000, if you wanted to watch a movie, you were going to a theatre or waiting upwards of a year or more to see it at home. Today? Guardians is the biggest hit of the year I think, it hits Disney+ and DVD, what? Next month? 3 months after release? Plenty of people here say they don't like going to the theater because people are rude, etc, they can wait and catch it at home because it won't take too long to get there. If i have a wife and 3 kids, am I likely to pay 60-70 bucks in tickets (or more depending on your location) plus food/drink at theater prices? Or tell them to wait 3 months and watch it at home, ostensibly for free (you pay for the service, but you were paying for it already).
The greed factor is pushing the availability too much. If they're at 3 months now, how long til it's 1.5? or 0? Put it on the big screen and streaming same day. And not same day like the pandemic where it was 30 bucks, but just putting on D+ or whatever at the normal rate.
You want people to go to theatres, you have to stop undermining the experience by giving to people at home within weeks, and then put out a good product. Not sure they're capable of doing either anymore.
Disney’s Harsh New Reality: Costly Film Flops, Creative Struggles and a Shrinking Global Box Office
Disney, once the theatrical gold standard, is experiencing a turn in box office fortunes.
variety.com
HeartBlade
Sr Member
Unfortunately this isnt just movies but all entertainment in general imo.Disney’s Harsh New Reality: Costly Film Flops, Creative Struggles and a Shrinking Global Box Office
Disney, once the theatrical gold standard, is experiencing a turn in box office fortunes.
Its part too big to fail and part its too big that failure would be disasterous. If you are spending billions of dollars making a film/video game/tv show/etc. it has to be a success of you're screwed. Hence why everything is so by the numbers cookie cutter remash of the same thing.
In video games, pretty much every modern AAA video game is the same now. Same control scheme (square or R1/R2 to attack, open world, pretty graphics, first person or third person action with RPG elements). They also reuse and continue preexisting IPs because new IPs could flop and unfortunately, the modern video game audience is far less sophisticated than the modern movie audience so they eat that stuff up.
Luckily for video games, the indie scene has become much more prominent and there are many good indie games that are honestly more fun and innovative than modern AAA games. Much rather play an indie than anything EA or Ubisoft can cough up.
The thing with entertainment though is while CGI and pretty graphics are nice, a good movie only needs a good story and direction to make work. The first entries of these famous IPs werent all made on huge blockbuster budgets but they were so engaging and unique and fun, they built a fanbase. I do thin entertainment needs to go back on this risk route, use those big budgets on making 5 unique movies instead of one cookie cutter and see if one of those 5 is a big hit.
VanPersie
Well-Known Member
Many have done since the OT anyway. Not everything has to go on forever, nor do they have to come into the Star Wars fandom.
Even if there’d have been nothing after the OT, it would eventually fade out of popularity and become just a few old movies as the generations who first watched them, leave the world.
Back to the title of this thread…
“We are actually the second owners…the franchise accessories come with the purchase and are only ‘slightly used’. You may be able to do something with them…”
- Star Wars is damaged goods with a divided fan base.
- Willow is DOA
- Indiana Jones appears to be buried
“We are actually the second owners…the franchise accessories come with the purchase and are only ‘slightly used’. You may be able to do something with them…”
Last edited:
joberg
Legendary Member
What the article fails to point out is that a lot of Disney/Pixar movies are being censored, or not shown at all, in various Muslim countries (LGBTQ characters/propaganda). They'll either wake-up and film other inserts that are within the accepted religious/political traditions in those countries (also the huge Chinese market & all) or they suffer at every level trying to peddle their ware in those corners of the world.Disney’s Harsh New Reality: Costly Film Flops, Creative Struggles and a Shrinking Global Box Office
Disney, once the theatrical gold standard, is experiencing a turn in box office fortunes.
Last edited:
HeartBlade
Sr Member
Also makes some assumptions that are not true.What the article fails to point out is that a lot of Disney/Pixar movies are being censored, or not shown at all, in various Muslim countries (LGBTQ characters/propaganda). They'll either wake-up and film other inserts that are within the accepted religious/political traditions in those countries (also the huge Chinese market & all) or they suffer at every level trying to peddle their ware in those corners of the world.
I think its blatantly clear that streaming has killed movies. Not how movies are made but how they are consumed. Covid naturally encouraged people to buy subscriptions and get used to the service and now that it has become mainstream, people just arnt going to theaters unless they are die-hard fans that need that “big screen” appearance. Why shell out $30 bucks to see little mermaid (parent and 2 kids) when you can wait and watch at home. They days of people going back to the theater on mass to watch and rewatch big movies is likely long gone. Like it or not, the pandoras’ box that is streaming is unleashed and cant be caged.
Obviously save releasing the mega hits like Marvel or Star Wars until a year after release. If you want to watch without spoilers, go to the theater.
And when it comes to other content, Disney used to be good at this. They made stupid Disney shows like Wizards of Waverly place or Hannah Montana which are huge hits with kids (now teens). Churn out these shows for content on D+ in the interim for cheap and if one of them becomes a big hit, make a low budget movie.
The studios saw Netflix making bank doing nothing but be a platform and wanted in which is understandable. But they need to gain a monopoly threshold in the market and maintain it somehow so people are incentivized to stay. Steam has done this with achievements, Sony and Microsoft with game exclusives. A bit harder to do on tv but having some kind of club or social media based on what you watch may be something they need to adopt (I hate the further proliferation of social media but thats what keeps people. People love those virtual likes).
Jaitea
Master Member
I go to the cinema when I want to see something good, Oppenheimer & Mission Impossible in IMAX, & later in the year Dune part 2
I had intended to see The Flash & Indy, but once I heard reviews, they were dropped
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a bad film at the cinema
John
I had intended to see The Flash & Indy, but once I heard reviews, they were dropped
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a bad film at the cinema
John
robstyle
Master Member
The catering budget may be out of context as covid compliance was in effect. That meant added staff to serve people individual items as only that server was allowed to handle the items in question. If you wanted a bottle of water, it was handed to you, a piece of bread one grape, a creamer for coffee... All individually hand plucked and handed to you. It was a silly time to be at craft service. There were also multiple covid compliance officers to monitor everything as well. That's not even mentioning anything prepared and served for meals.
What the article fails to point out is that a lot of Disney/Pixar movies are being censored, or not shown at all, in various Muslim countries (LGBTQ characters/propaganda). They'll either wake-up and film other inserts that are within the accepted religious/political traditions in those countries (also the huge Chinese market & all) or they suffer at every level trying to peddle their ware in those corners of the world.
...you're not saying that Disney is hypocritical, are you?
drusselmeyer
Master Member
That means Harrison Ford could finally have TWO donuts if he were in the cast!
Egon Spengler
Master Member
Mike Zeroh is just clickbait garbage
joberg
Legendary Member
Banned Disney movies:
1. Beauty and The Beast
Back in 2017, Disney celebrated its "first gay character," Lefou, in the live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast. The only confirmation he was gay was one second of him dancing with a man in a crowd scene, but still, it was enough to get the film banned in Kuwait.
Next up was the Pixar film Onward, which features a cyclops cop voiced by Lena Waithe who has one line when she mentions her girlfriend and says the popular gay catchphrase "it gets better." The scene was cut in Russia, and the movie was banned in Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.
Marvel's first gay superhero also got his movie banned. In 2021, Marvel released The Eternals, which featured Phastos, a gay, married man, and his husband. The film was banned in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar after Disney refused to edit out the scene involving Phastos and his husband.
Steven Speilberg's adaptation of West Side Story was the next Disney film to get banned. In it, Speilberg updated the character Anybodys to be trans, played by nonbinary actor Iris Menas. Because of that, the film was banned in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
Despite America Chavez's lesbianism being completely absent in the latest Doctor Strange movie, the film was still banned in Saudi Arabia and possibly Kuwait due to a small scene where she talks about having two lesbian moms.
Lightyear is the latest Disney film to be banned overseas for LGBTQ+ content. It's been banned in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for its inclusion of a same-sex kiss between two women.
modelcitizen
Sr Member
better yet watch it closer and note it was Patricia Neil....Lots of people should view the movie "Fountain Head" with Gary Cooper and Barbara Stanwick and see what I'm talking about.
Imperial Weapon
Well-Known Member
Honestly I think the current canon should be erased and legends should be expanded upon since we have no TFU3 or BF3 (BF3 wasn't Disneys fault but damn it looked better than that EA stuff) and the big one I think is the transition from Old republic to parts of EU material that came before the Phantom Menace and I also feel that Disney has lalmost no aesthetic appeal too like for example the original stormtrooper look plasticy right? well the sequel ones don't even look like theres people inside and that there like walking action figures, Obi Wan looked like a budget cosplayer version of himself in the show with that beige shirt he had.. The big one though is there tendency to get you hyped then leave you with next to nothing like Mando S2 when we were all excited to see what happened with Grogu in S3 and then it gets ruined in BOBF and I could go on and on but SW ATM is just losing its magic and I think if what I wish for above were to happen I think underworlds should be remade aswell.
joberg
Legendary Member
Right you are...I had just watched "Ball of Fire" with Cooper and Stanwyck
Too fast on the "enter" buttonSimilar threads
