Disney General - The saddest fandom on Earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter KO 864
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Which is Better

  • Chicken Little

    Votes: 433 27.5%
  • Hunchback 2

    Votes: 57 3.6%
  • A slow death

    Votes: 1,087 68.9%

  • Total voters
    1,577
Ignoring the fact that they did the “beauty on the inside” thing way better with the Hunchback and BatB, that ends up being weird when you consider that the Evil Queen was considered the fairest before Snow White came along. Was the entire kingdom full of dicks, and she happened to be the least dickish of them all?
It's just retarded. The whole point Snow White is the most beautiful because the evil queen would only care about external looks.

All the changes to the original shows that even AI is still preferable to woke board meetings that try to make the film fit the ever growing (and contradictory) list of political trends.
 
>When there's no more racism and blacks are hailed as superior
Tbh the vast majority of truly virulent racism against whites that I see isn't even from black people other than The Usual Suspects. It's mostly from self-loathing white and/or (((white))) people. Dangerhair troons. Lily white faggots who are 1/32nd some tribe that didn't even historically exist.
 
Turning Red though is different because that movie explicitly takes place in Canada and why would 2000s Canadian Kids give a shit about what happens in America.
I’m probably the kind of guy that gives Mr Enter more credit than he deserves for that take. Sure, it was worded in the most retarded way possible. But he has a point- this movie does not feel like anything made in 2001. It feels like something from the late 10’s or early 20’s. There are no references to major historical events from then, there are no fashions from the time, and there’s nothing in the movie’s OST that feels like it would come from the early aughties.

When it comes to historical fiction media like this or GTA Vice City, you need to show us that this is a movie set in that time period, and not just tell us. Vice City does this well. Turning Red doesn’t.
 
When it comes to historical fiction media like this or GTA Vice City, you need to show us that this is a movie set in that time period, and not just tell us. Vice City does this well. Turning Red doesn’t.
Vice City is the gold standard for historical game settings.
 
It's just retarded. The whole point Snow White is the most beautiful because the evil queen would only care about external looks.
Ya know, I hate to play the "Even I could write better woke slop than these retards" game but would it not have been a whole lot more in line with progressive schtick, both traditional and currentyear, for the mirror plot to be be some two bit "traditional beauty standards bad" story?

I mean for one thing it would answer exactly why Gadot would be jealous of Zeglers Snuffleupagus looking ass, as a vain sorcerer queen obsessed with her own physical beauty being told to her face by her own reflection that she is uglier than her decidedly fugly and inexplicably mexican stepdaughter is the perfect setup both for her to go full narcissistic psychopath, and also to start mainlining more black magic into her veins in a desperate attempt herself look prettier for her mirror until she straight up warps herself into a hideous old hag, in a phenomenally unsubtle allusion to plastic surgery addiction.

Meanwhile Snow Mid happily lives out her life with the Seven CGI creaturas not really giving a shit about how she looks nor even realising she is driving her stepmother fucking bananas, and Prince whatever-the-fuck-his-name-was falls in love with her because of how generally chill she is to be around compared to the image obsessed Evil Queen groupie noblewomen he is surrounded with at home...I dunno I aint a fucking romance writer if it doesnt involve me balls deep in Patrick S Tomlinson's ass

What I am getting at here is that making a currentyear wokewashed snow white should have been a fairly simple affair in concept, yet they decided to turn the end product into some incoherent mush of leftist revolutionary LARP buzzwords and narratives, likely due to the producers being hooked on the whole "Modern Audience" bullshit that has been singularly responsible for so fucking much of the cringe of the last decade.
 
@Judge Holden The thing is there is a Snow White movie that does the whole beauty standards bad and let people enjoy themselves and it was the Korean Snow White film where she's a fat girl with the moral being about physical beauty not mattering and the Evil Queen being an old hag who steals the youth from others for her vanity.

With that and your idea it's from a place of actually caring while the Disney live action remake mainly cares on pandering to algorithms and nostalgia
 
My older brother sent me a message earlier today asking me if I would be interested in watching the "live action" Lilo and Stitch movie with him and our mom when it comes out. His argument when I said that I didn't like it from what little I've seen is that I've only gotten my opinion from people online. Maybe I don't want my view of a movie I loved when I was a kid ruined with creepy CGI? :mad:
 
@Judge Holden The thing is there is a Snow White movie that does the whole beauty standards bad and let people enjoy themselves and it was the Korean Snow White film where she's a fat girl with the moral being about physical beauty not mattering and the Evil Queen being an old hag who steals the youth from others for her vanity.
Honestly I think Snow White is the easiest of the classic disney princess movies to spin in a progressive/woke direction given how "jealousy over physical beauty" is the core of the story, and has been a progressive/feminist hobby horse long before currentyear and wokeshit.

Cinderella is an "escaping a shitty family and falling in love" story at its heart which is perfectly fine and dandy but one would have to contrive quite a bit in order to have it match normie level progressive themes and even more for it to be wokified.

Sleeping Beauty would be a fucking nightmare since the whole schtick of the plot is "she fucking sleeps through the entire third act lol" rendering the main character extremely difficult to add any obvious progressive/woke spin even with liberal use of a crowbar due to the lack of angle. I guess shit could be grafted on to the story but frankly I think we had enough of that with Maleficent.

That's another point I don't understand. Why couldn't they hire dwarf actors who probably need the work? Besides the fact that irl dwarfs are disturbing in their body proportions.
Peter Dinklage pulled the footstool up after him after hitting big. Between him and Warwick Davis I am starting to despise midges as much as jeets
1743161186441.png
 
His argument when I said that I didn't like it from what little I've seen is that I've only gotten my opinion from people online.
I fucking hate this shit. It's literally the exact same excuse trotted out for the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy, Fembusters 2016, etc. Maybe those "terminally online manbaby chuds" have a valid point if so many of them are saying that it looks like shit.
 
I honestly can't wrap my head around it.
Ego? Too much middle management? Does Disney really let newbies run hogshed over their IPs? Perhaps Disney is 'too big to fail' but they seem to be trying to challenge that narrative.
What I imagine is, the CEOs are of course out of touch, they pay some of their underlings to predict audience reactions. The underlings, who are more than likely spoilt millenials who went to that Disney University program, target the terminally online hugboxes full of whales who share their spoilt opinions, and use that input to justify DEIsasters to the CEOs. CEOs dont give a shit because its, again, 'too big to fail'. CEOs can also act like its giving the brand a good image by giving the still spoilt yet brown ones a 'chance'. I imagine the CEOs get paid regardless of what happens, and can bail and keep the bag if it goes to shit.
'Unimaginitive' and 'souless' are becoming Disney's biggest descriptors. Disney is run and operated by upper/upper middle class jokers who are increasingly forgetting that the working class is even an audience
 
My older brother sent me a message earlier today asking me if I would be interested in watching the "live action" Lilo and Stitch movie with him and our mom when it comes out. His argument when I said that I didn't like it from what little I've seen is that I've only gotten my opinion from people online. Maybe I don't want my view of a movie I loved when I was a kid ruined with creepy CGI? :mad:
Your brother needs to be taken out to pasture, he's too far gone.
 
I honestly can't wrap my head around it.
Ego? Too much middle management? Does Disney really let newbies run hogshed over their IPs? Perhaps Disney is 'too big to fail' but they seem to be trying to challenge that narrative.
What I imagine is, the CEOs are of course out of touch, they pay some of their underlings to predict audience reactions. The underlings, who are more than likely spoilt millenials who went to that Disney University program, target the terminally online hugboxes full of whales who share their spoilt opinions, and use that input to justify DEIsasters to the CEOs. CEOs dont give a shit because its, again, 'too big to fail'. CEOs can also act like its giving the brand a good image by giving the still spoilt yet brown ones a 'chance'. I imagine the CEOs get paid regardless of what happens, and can bail and keep the bag if it goes to shit.
'Unimaginitive' and 'souless' are becoming Disney's biggest descriptors. Disney is run and operated by upper/upper middle class jokers who are increasingly forgetting that the working class is even an audience
On the part of the higher ups it was a mix of utter "the normies will mindlessly consoom no matter what we shit out" arrogance mixed with the figurative magical beans of the "modern audience obsessed with muh diversity and muh social media bandwagon causes and muh currentyear references" bullshit which they kept throwing money at despite the decided failure to sprout any beanstalks and absolute slavish reliance on the hired consultant groups who sold them the previous two items of bullshit to begin with

For those lower down the chain it was short term slashing and burning in order to get immediate hits of social media capital/institutional gibdats and awards/corporate opportunities and advancements no matter how badly this fucked up the projects they were assigned to in the long run and the company as a whole going forward.

Frankly Disney needed a Disney. Someone with something halfway resembling actual passion for making shit people liked no matter how jaded and cynical they were, as well as having the spine to deliver basic fucking discipline to those beneath them in order to cut out shit that could hurt the company and piss off the public, as well as being shrewd enough not to mindlessly agree with whatever consultancy charlatan unfurled their spreadsheets in front of them and conduct their own in-house market research in which any potential pozz is ruthlessly removed.
 
Frankly Disney needed a Disney. Someone with something halfway resembling actual passion for making shit people liked no matter how jaded and cynical they were, as well as having the spine to deliver basic fucking discipline to those beneath them in order to cut out shit that could hurt the company and piss off the public, as well as being shrewd enough not to mindlessly agree with whatever consultancy charlatan unfurled their spreadsheets in front of them and conduct their own in-house market research in which any potential pozz is ruthlessly removed.
1743172478220.png
We all owe this man the biggest apology. We had no idea how relatively good we had it under him.
 
I honestly can't wrap my head around it.
Ego? Too much middle management? Does Disney really let newbies run hogshed over their IPs? Perhaps Disney is 'too big to fail' but they seem to be trying to challenge that narrative.
What I imagine is, the CEOs are of course out of touch, they pay some of their underlings to predict audience reactions. The underlings, who are more than likely spoilt millenials who went to that Disney University program, target the terminally online hugboxes full of whales who share their spoilt opinions, and use that input to justify DEIsasters to the CEOs. CEOs dont give a shit because its, again, 'too big to fail'. CEOs can also act like its giving the brand a good image by giving the still spoilt yet brown ones a 'chance'. I imagine the CEOs get paid regardless of what happens, and can bail and keep the bag if it goes to shit.
'Unimaginitive' and 'souless' are becoming Disney's biggest descriptors. Disney is run and operated by upper/upper middle class jokers who are increasingly forgetting that the working class is even an audience
Current America makes it most advantageous to nose dive a company for a CEO. There is a good chance Iger is pulling a Zazlav and is intentionally killing the company to sell it to another company for bigger profits.

If not that, there is probably a backdoor chain of operations making him wealthy. Obviously we have Blackrock investors which pay to push the social aspects. Disney was also getting cash from government programs, want to say the Department of Defense was backdoor funding them. Even without all this, Disney is too big to be allowed to fail. If Iger crashed the entire company tomorrow, the US would rush in with a trillion dollars to restart it as no one wants to allow for that level of an economic hit.
 
My guess as to the thought process is as follows
  1. Actual ginger people are rare as fuck IRL and thus there are a miniscule number of halfway competent ginger actors and actresses in the industry, relatively speaking
  2. Actual ginger people are extremely common in works of literary/drawn/animated fiction, adaptations of which tend to draw the baleful eye of OG material fan swarms
  3. Actors and Actresses do not especially like either dying their hair red or spending an entire shoot wearing a wig unless they absolutely have to, especially the more image obsessed ones who don't want to mess up their hair, which gets fed back to the general production pipelines over the years
  4. There is a sharp increase in producers shitting out slop adaptations of literary/drawn/animated fiction for the past decade and a half to the point where the on paper demand for ginger actors/actresses skyrockets even further
  5. The consultancy sphere begin massively pushing muh-diversity schtick for the past decade and a half to the point where racial quotas become unofficially/officially normalised in media land
  6. Producers for new projects go down the casting lists and realise they could kill two birds with one stone by having the redhead played by a nigger or a jeet, and thus pre-emptively chill any backlash to the character not being ginger because said backlash would automatically be denounced en masse as raysiss
Why is it literally always a nigger though? And why does it extend far past just live action?
 
Why is it literally always a nigger though? And why does it extend far past just live action?
Because shaniquas make up a massively disproportionate segment of the media consultancy sphere, having gibbed datted the lions share of shitty humanities degrees in the last couple decades. As for why it started popping up beyond live action my guess is that this pattern became noticed in-industry and sequentially used as an excuse to nigwash gingers in animation too
 
If Iger crashed the entire company tomorrow, the US would rush in with a trillion dollars to restart it as no one wants to allow for that level of an economic hit.
A trillion in unbacked fiat notes. And Americanda's infinite currency printing ponzi isn't looking too good these days, like it's fraying at the edges, the State looking into the next system (CBDCs), and foreign governments de-dollarizing because they're sick of dealing with (((America's))) one-sided world policing using printable fiat as a debt weapon against smaller nations.

Let's remember that Iger was the faggot who ruined Twin Peaks back in the day. Dude needs a one-way ticket to the red room with Bob.
 
The current Twitter logic of "Gal Gadot is a bad actress, ergo Israel/Jews are bad; Rachel Zegler was styled badly, ergo Palestine/wokies are bad" is...quite something, I must say.

Still think it's retarded that anyone is buying into the clearly nonexistent catfight between these two actresses since it's clearly a Disney-fabricated distraction from the fact that the production was supremely ill-conceived from the jump, but hey any excuse to scream about Israel I guess.

Anyway a good number of my normie coworkers see all of these movies with their kids regardless of whatever the drama is so there's a good amount of audience capture built into these products no matter how bad they may be.
 
Back
Top Bottom