Disney General - The saddest fandom on Earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter KO 864
  • Start date Start date

Which is Better

  • Chicken Little

    Votes: 383 26.0%
  • Hunchback 2

    Votes: 53 3.6%
  • A slow death

    Votes: 1,036 70.4%

  • Total voters
    1,472
View attachment 6679287

This is a preview image for the live-action Moana remake, by the way.
"Live-Action Moana Remake"

This is just another "The Rock's ego self-reassurance movie"

I guarantee the only reason Moana's remake is even happening is just to soothe all the bruises The Rock's ego has received more than anything else. Otherwise, Disney would've made their Moana remake in like 2030 when all the little kids who saw it in 2016 are older at that time
 
"Live-Action Moana Remake"

This is just another "The Rock's ego self-reassurance movie"

I guarantee the only reason Moana's remake is even happening is just to soothe all the bruises The Rock's ego has received more than anything else. Otherwise, Disney would've made their Moana remake in like 2030 when all the little kids who saw it in 2016 are older at that time
having the remake so close to the original should make the comparison more extreme and turn people off cgi/live action
 
First sort of teaser trailer thing for Lilo and Stitch.
Can't help but compare this scene to the one that takes place in her bedroom in the original. I'm assuming it means that won't happen again, which is sad, as it shows off the whole movie monster reference better and how violent Stitch actually is (like with the biting of the car and the screaming).
 
Disney's head is so far up their own rectum that they don't seem to understand the immense cannibalization that's about to happen.

The sequel ( even with it's subpar soundtrack) will scratch the itch of any Nostalgia audiences had in them.

The LA remake by contrast will offer nothing new and will feel incredibly draining because we just got the sequel a year before.

The only thing this series of events has made me realize is that the original Moana was something special but not appreciated at the time it released.

Now we have Disney trying to reap the rewards of something they didn't think twice about before 2 years ago
 
The only thing this series of events has made me realize is that the original Moana was something special but not appreciated at the time it released.
It's a pretty good movie. Shame the sequel's soundtrack isn't quite up to snuff, but if it reviews even half as well it'll still be decent.
I don't know what you guys are talking about TBH. Its an incredibly mid film where the only memorable part is the end. I recently re-watched and I still barely remember the rest of the film because the rest of the film is milquetoast inconsequential time filler.
 
Isn’t he legally not allowed to lose when he’s onscreen? They’re going to have to rewrite the Tamatoa fight or remove it completely, aren’t they?
Yeah which is part of why The Rock wants to make this movie. At best he'll take a punch or two, but he will be triumphant.

As I said before, I am thoroughly convinced that The Rock is the main reason Moana is getting a remake so quickly. Disney had other films with a lot of nostalgia before it to remake and were probably going to do it down the line, but Dwayne is a narcissist with a fragile ego
 
I don't know what you guys are talking about TBH. Its an incredibly mid film where the only memorable part is the end. I recently re-watched and I still barely remember the rest of the film because the rest of the film is milquetoast inconsequential time filler.
I'll grant you that the story is the weakest part, but apart from that I found it to be very enjoyable. Thankfully it seems the sequel improves in this area so hopefully the reviews will reflect that.
 
it really tells you the difference between millenials and zoomers that there is way more outrage about this 23 year later LA remake vs Aladdin or The Lion King. Also 23 years isn't really "a short time ago" by any means, its literally an entire generation. Dawn of the dead and its remake both are considered amazing despite the remake being so soon after the original.

Not that this film won't suck but 23 years is long enough, especially nowadays that it makes sense for people to remake it. Morena might flop massively because of how soon that one is though.
 
When will these faggots release Zootopia 2? The original was the 2nd highest grossing Disney film of 2016 and a sleeper hit compared to the likes of Frozen and TLK remake.
 
When will these faggots release Zootopia 2? The original was the 2nd highest grossing Disney film of 2016 and a sleeper hit compared to the likes of Frozen and TLK remake.

"Zootopia 2 is scheduled to be released in the United States on November 26, 2025."

Maybe they can do two different render passes on it to be the first animated and then the first "live action" film.
 
it really tells you the difference between millenials and zoomers that there is way more outrage about this 23 year later LA remake vs Aladdin or The Lion King. Also 23 years isn't really "a short time ago" by any means, its literally an entire generation. Dawn of the dead and its remake both are considered amazing despite the remake being so soon after the original.

Not that this film won't suck but 23 years is long enough, especially nowadays that it makes sense for people to remake it. Morena might flop massively because of how soon that one is though.
It's not really whether it's long enough for a remake to be justified, it's whether it's even justified in the first place. And after a decade now of Disney aggressively digging up every IP they own and parading their corpses around in live action, the answer seems to be a resounding no for anyone that cares about the art of filmmaking.

Sure, there are families that will just go ahead and take their kids to see whatever Disney movie is out, live action or animated, without really caring that much. There's a reason these remakes have generally made money regardless of how badly they've butchered the source material. But I'd like to think that even the slower members of the audience are starting to notice the lack of soul that these modern productions have, a watered-down approach that takes away a lot of the magic and ignores the strengths of what animation can do. Even if they hit all the same beats as the originals, it's just not the same. And that's before getting into the "modern audience" pandering, whether it's race swapping characters or reframing things in a feminist lens.

I don't know if it's necessarily more outrage for Lilo and Stitch than for earlier ones, there were certainly plenty of people pointing out how awful those movies were (still waiting on part 2 of your Lion King takedown, YMS). Even if it's about the same amount of time between animated and live action movies for all these examples, I think part of it comes down to when the originals were released. Lilo and Stitch came out in 2002, firmly in this century (millennium, even), so it feels like less of a gap than to go from the 1990s to the 2010s. Thus, the question of why remake it in the first place sticks out more. And don't even get me started on remaking Moana when it isn't even a decade old, a move that is so outrageously pointless that I hope it flops miserably so they stop this shit entirely (also I hate The Rock and I want to see him suffer failure).

But like I said, there will always be people who go to see it because it's a "new" thing from Disney, so this trend probably has some life left in it yet. I just hope it's not that much.
 
Also unlike a lot of their other live action things isn't Moana rather cartoony? like there is way more going on there vs say animating Stitch for 90 minutes. She's battling sea monsters and there's a chicken and the rock's tattoos move around and its quite the ordeal to have "work" in live action.

of course you could say that about the other shitty films they've made but that just feels like a recipe for disaster.
 
Sure, there are families that will just go ahead and take their kids to see whatever Disney movie is out, live action or animated, without really caring that much. There's a reason these remakes have generally made money regardless of how badly they've butchered the source material. But I'd like to think that even the slower members of the audience are starting to notice the lack of soul that these modern productions have, a watered-down approach that takes away a lot of the magic and ignores the strengths of what animation can do. Even if they hit all the same beats as the originals, it's just not the same. And that's before getting into the "modern audience" pandering, whether it's race swapping characters or reframing things in a feminist lens.
Plus they probably are cluing in that kids find the remakes boring. I've heard many people online say that they brought their kids to watch The Little Mernigger and the kids were super bored and hated it. It doesn't have the charm of the original show.
 
Daily reminder that Furries the world over raged that Gadget did not end up with Chip.
Yes, and they were completely justified for having that rage.

Even non-furries went "wtf!?!?". Whoever thought to ship a mouse with a fly deserves to be publicly hanged for crimes against common fucking sense.
 
I don't know what you guys are talking about TBH. Its an incredibly mid film where the only memorable part is the end. I recently re-watched and I still barely remember the rest of the film because the rest of the film is milquetoast inconsequential time filler.


Moana succeeds where so many modern Disney productions fail. She feels like a real person—curious about her world but also naïve and prone to mistakes, as any young protagonist should be. What makes her remarkable is that her story isn’t weighed down by the suffocating baggage of identity politics. She earns her place through action and determination, not through the shallow pandering of diversity quotas. Moana’s struggles and triumphs are hers alone, with no sense of entitlement or shortcuts.

The music, though initially unassuming, reveals its brilliance in hindsight. It complements the narrative and themes rather than competing for attention or relying on gimmicks to be memorable.

But Disney’s commitment to such craftsmanship seems to have eroded in recent years. Too often, their protagonists flaunt their flaws as virtues, refusing to grow or change because, apparently, it’s the world that’s wrong, not them. Look no further than Raya and the Last Dragon. The so-called antagonist, a conniving, backstabbing wretch, is inexplicably absolved of her sins because society—or worse, Raya herself—is held responsible for her actions. This absurd moral relativism dilutes any meaningful character arcs.

And then we have Wish. Asha, a teenager with the political wisdom of a toddler, isn’t portrayed as inexperienced or out of her depth. No, it’s the king who bears the brunt of blame because he refuses to grant every wish with reckless abandon. The film’s message, if it can be called that, is infantile: optimism trumps reality, and anyone who disagrees is obviously a villain. This isn’t character writing; it’s propaganda for the participation trophy generation.

Disney’s recent output is an insult to the intelligence of its audience. Where are the arcs? The growth? The consequences? Characters like Moana remind us what storytelling can achieve when sincerity and effort are prioritized over preaching. Until Disney rediscovers its discipline, their works will continue to rot beneath the weight of their own mediocrity.
 
Back