Disney General - The saddest fandom on Earth

[neverendingmidi]

Its not that hard to take a dark subject and set a fluffy enough tone so that it becomes suitable for children. See: Little Shop of Horrors, Sweeney Todd, and A Series of Unfortunate Events. Obviously Cruella can never murder a puppy on screen, but it wouldn't be difficult to portray her as a fun and eccentric character.

Or there's always the dumb option:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gSCv8R5V5xo

Once Upon A Time is made by Disney, so I would assume they’re going stupid.

The thing is Cruella wasn’t obsessed with killing just puppies, in fact the only reason she wanted to kill the puppies was because they were softer. The main thing she wanted was the spotted fur. She was equal opportunity in the killing for fur thing. If she had liked the texture of the adult dogs better, she would’ve been collecting adult dalmatians to kill.

 

[friedshrimp]

Honestly, seeing how corporate-driven and public-appeasing Disney is nowadays, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they go the Maleficent route and make some dumb origin story for Cruella, because girls need role models and god forbid we can't have female villains anymore. About how she was a model / fashion designer in the making and had great aspirations for the future, but an evil WHITE MALE manipulated her and wronged her and stole her ideas or shit like that, and then she turns evil because so. She takes it out on dogs because he owned dogs or something. And then it's all a misunderstanding and HE'S the real villain and Cruella saves the Dalmatians in the climax or some dumb shit like that.

It's either that or they give her lesbo subtext with Anita, since they gave the gay subtext in Hermione and the Beast...I'll be very surprised if Disney keeps her as wicked as she is with no chance of redemption or woke readings.

It's kinda weird considering there's a female villain out there that Disney could milk on and make her sympathetic (URSULA), it's right there in the subtext of the original film. But they give redemption stories to the most wicked bitches of the villains, it's downright weird.

 

[RumblyTumbly]

See I can flip this bigotry thing against them.

So what? Are they saying that women CAN'T be the villain? Are limiting the roles they can have in cinema? Are you saying that women can only be perfect angel role models and have to be pigeonholed into those roles in every piece of media?

I mean playing the villain is more fun anyway. Take your perfect little role models. I'd much rather watch Alan Rickman Gruber it up over here in Die Hard, thank you very much.

See it really complicates things when you don't just let writers and storytellers tell the stories they want to tell.

And as its been stated before, if you don't like current media, then be the change you want and write your own shit instead of trying to hijack other people's work and transform the meaning of it.

 

[Muttnik]

You really could make films about ANY of the other Disney villains and frame them as sympathetic. Anyone BUT Cruella.

Scar--backstory shit where he was neglected for being secondborn and made friends with the hyenas because that's all he had. Hell, there's already tons of fan theories out there that it was his father that gave him his scar.

Ursula--was originally the true ruler of the sea but got it stolen unfairly and was left to languish away and now she wants revenge on the cheater's daughter.

Frollo--Overall nice man of God and even adopted a malformed kid but was unable to get the girl he wanted and slowly loses it because of it.

Cruella is just so...out there. I don't know why someone would look at someone so extreme and think YEAH THAT'S THE ONE THAT CAN BE REDEEMED! Disney is pretty bonkers if you ask me.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

Frollo--Overall nice man of God and even adopted a malformed kid but was unable to get the girl he wanted and slowly loses it because of it.

This movie will never be made simply because it revolves around Catholicism and religion is bad according to Hollywood and Disney knows that--also can't say "gypsy" anymore apparently. But also because any movie that attempts to throw a sympathetic light on Disney's Frollo is not going to work because the man was shown to be bigoted and abusive from the very moment he's shown on-screen (or even just before his introduction, he's that corrupt). Like he's so bigoted against gypsies that I'm pretty sure gypsies killed his parents if we're to give him a backstory.

Though Hunchback is due for another Hollywood adaptation at this point, tbh, but maybe once PC-culture has died out. ()

 

[friedshrimp]

I can't even see a Hunchback movie made nowadays, tbh. It wouldn't fit with modern Disney and their marketing-ladden image of Elsas and Reys. It's too bleak to promote alongside the trailer of Let It Go.

 

[Steamboat_Bill]

I can't even see a Hunchback movie made nowadays, tbh. It wouldn't fit with modern Disney and their marketing-ladden image of Elsas and Reys. It's too bleak to promote alongside the trailer of Let It Go.

It was too bleak in the 90s as well.

 

[Doctor of Autism]

You really could make films about ANY of the other Disney villains and frame them as sympathetic. Anyone BUT Cruella.

Scar--backstory shit where he was neglected for being secondborn and made friends with the hyenas because that's all he had. Hell, there's already tons of fan theories out there that it was his father that gave him his scar.

Ursula--was originally the true ruler of the sea but got it stolen unfairly and was left to languish away and now she wants revenge on the cheater's daughter.

Frollo--Overall nice man of God and even adopted a malformed kid but was unable to get the girl he wanted and slowly loses it because of it.

Cruella is just so...out there. I don't know why someone would look at someone so extreme and think YEAH THAT'S THE ONE THAT CAN BE REDEEMED! Disney is pretty bonkers if you ask me.

Also even Gaston could be framed as sympathetic:

Gaston - Humble young hunter who became more ego-driven and powerhungry due to how the town enabled him, and he couldn't express interest in other things or the town would turn on him for being different.


Like seriously a lot of other female Disney villains could be framed as sympathetic but they choose the most evil of the bunch.

 

[KO 864]

Also even Gaston could be framed as sympathetic:

Gaston - Humble young hunter who became more ego-driven and powerhungry due to how the town enabled him, and he couldn't express interest in other things or the town would turn on him for being different.


Like seriously a lot of other female Disney villains could be framed as sympathetic but they choose the most evil of the bunch.

It's because the most evil Disney villains tend to be the most popular. Cruella, Maleficent, Yzma, Rattigan; they're the most fun but they're hard to justify the actions of, meaning that there's a discrepancy between what has the recognition to get butts in seats, and who would work as a decent protagonist.

 

[Doctor of Autism]

It's because the most evil Disney villains tend to be the most popular. Cruella, Maleficent, Yzma, Rattigan; they're the most fun but they're hard to justify the actions of, meaning that there's a discrepancy between what has the recognition to get butts in seats, and who would work as a decent protagonist.

Yeah I get that but like I think every Disney Renaissance villain is more popular than Cruella so that's kinda moot.

 

[KO 864]

Yeah I get that but like I think every Disney Renaissance villain is more popular than Cruella so that's kinda moot.

I guess. But there's what 1 female villain from the period and the budget of an underwater movie especially one with a presumably large amount of tentwcles might be higher than what they'd go for on one of these villain movies. Tentacles are hard to animate in 3d if the commentary of Finding Dory is anything to go by. It would get them a lot of woke points, especially if they play into Ursula being based on Devine.

However Cruella as a character would probably appeal to both Millennial and maybe older Disney fans. I'm not really sure. Thinking about it, they probably chose Cruella and Maleficent because they can't milk the non-Renaisance films for Millennial bucks in a straight remake, so they make a vaguely woke one focusing on the female villains. Either that or the poeple in charge of the movies are doing the characters they are familiar with.

Personally I think the most sensical villain centered movie would be a Hades focus film. There's a lot to his character they could focus on given how he more or less just played the devil in Hercules. They could do a pretty funny movie about him suing Hercules to get his dog back (actual myth)

Edit: It's hard for me to judge popularity of Disney Villains as I grew up with the Silver age movies mostly, as well as a few of the early Renaissance films, mostly Aladdin and Lion King. We just had what we could find on DVD

 

[UnKillFill]

This entire discussion reminds me of this song.

 

[Muttnik]

This entire discussion reminds me of this song.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=zKWt-4FBjHY

I LOVE Twisted. Though it ruined Aladdin for me for a while.

 

[Night Owl]

Maybe they chose Cruella because she's not that popular and they think they can get away with messing with her character? When I think of iconic Disney villains, she honestly isn't the first one to come to mind, at least to me (probably not even in the first ten or so) and I've seen 101 Dalmatians as a kid.

 

[Fandom Trash]

Yeah, not really looking forward to the live action 101 dalmatians. Not to mention that when this movie comes out, a lot of kids are going to bug their parents to get them a dalmatian only to abandon it after a while.

I think that happened before when the animated movie came out years ago. Its going to happen again.


I was recently checking out all the disney flims coming out for the next 2 or so years and almost all of them are going to live action, especially in 2020.

Like we have live action : mulan, dumbo, little mermaid, 101 dalmatian, maleficent 2, lion king (not really live action), freaking jack and the beanstalk might be getting a live action film, aladdin, peter pan, freaking sword in the stone, tinkerbell, and so much more.


I hate to say it, but I miss 3d animated films now and wish there were more being made for the future. There's hardly any coming out, except for toy story 4.

 

[Nekromantik]

Not to mention that when this movie comes out, a lot of kids are going to bug their parents to get them a dalmatian only to abandon it after a while.

I remember when the first live action 101 dalmatian movie came out, this was the exact thing that happened. I worked at a vet clinic at the the time and we saw so many dalmatians come in that had problems.

Too many puppy mills started breeding (inbreeding) them to keep up with demand. I saw some with skin problems, hip problems, and the worst of all, mental problems. A lot of the dalmatians had horrible separation anxiety, or just anxiety in general. We had one that had started chewing it's own legs due to stress. Or you had people that didn't understand how much energy a dog like that would need, so the poor things had anxiety from not being exercised enough.

It really messed up the breed as a whole, and I'm sure it will only get worse after this new movie will come out.

 

[MysticMisty]

Its going to happen again.

It will. When the first live-action one came out in the 90's a lot of people went out and bought dalmatians without doing any research because they thought the ones in the movie were cute. The thing about dalmatians though is that they are not friendly dogs. They were originally bred to maul any potential bandits out on the road while traveling, and are associated with fire stations because early firemen used them for the same purpose: to maul any potential burglers who wanted to steal the fire engine. The result is that there was an influx of unwanted dogs because if the kids didn't get bored with them, they had to go due to aggression problems.

 

[Wakko Warner]

I was recently checking out all the disney flims coming out for the next 2 or so years and almost all of them are going to live action, especially in 2020.

Like we have live action : mulan, dumbo, little mermaid, 101 dalmatian, maleficent 2, lion king (not really live action), freaking jack and the beanstalk might be getting a live action film, aladdin, peter pan, freaking sword in the stone, tinkerbell, and so much more.

There's also going to be a live-action Lilo and Stitch pretty soon, and Disney Channel's also getting a live-action Kim Possible movie.

I feel bad for normal people who have to deal with 3rd wave feminist/SJW cunts at colleges. Seriously this shit is ridiculous. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment...tle-mermaid-misogny-complaints-154743722.html

This makes less sense than the people who thought "Baby, It's Cold Outside" was about the same thing...

It will. When the first live-action one came out in the 90's a lot of people went out and bought dalmatians without doing any research because they thought the ones in the movie were cute. The thing about dalmatians though is that they are not friendly dogs. They were originally bred to maul any potential bandits out on the road while traveling, and are associated with fire stations because early firemen used them for the same purpose: to maul any potential burglers who wanted to steal the fire engine. The result is that there was an influx of unwanted dogs because if the kids didn't get bored with them, they had to go due to aggression problems.

There was an article I read when Finding Dory was going to be released about how people actually thought clownfish would be good pets after seeing the original Finding Nemo. Can't parents teach their kids that they can't always get what they want?

 

[Trilby]

There's also going to be a live-action Lilo and Stitch pretty soon, and Disney Channel's also getting a live-action Kim Possible movie.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=TNRQT9ODqDI
This makes less sense than the people who thought "Baby, It's Cold Outside" was about the same thing...


There was an article I read when Finding Dory was going to be released about how people actually thought clownfish would be good pets after seeing the original Finding Nemo. Can't parents teach their kids that they can't always get what they want?

You only wish they were smart enough to say no. I think that generation of parenting died in the 80's along with spanking.

 

[MysticMisty]

There was an article I read when Finding Dory was going to be released about how people actually thought clownfish would be good pets after seeing the original Finding Nemo. Can't parents teach their kids that they can't always get what they want?

I was going to bring that up in my previous post since it's incredibly ironic given the plot of Finding Nemo, but didn't since it's technically a Pixar movie. Anyways I don't know why some people give into this type of thing so easily. It could be a way of flaunting wealth, or pretending to be wealthier than you really are. I knew a guy in 8th and 9th grade who would get every exotic pet he wanted and would only use them in the context of how much wealthier he was than my family, even though he didn't really care about them otherwise (if you want more details I wrote about this guy in one of the early pages of the pet horror thread).