I know Disney's entire movie strategy right now is basically either capeshit or nostalgia bait...

>Grace Randolph
Go and have a look at her top 10 from last year. I've never seen a person with shittier taste

And that's only after 64 reviews. It's probably going to sink into the 30's

MCU is hit or miss but the miss is "mediocre but watchable" while the hit is "ok movie", so is overal a decent franchise

Pixar is by far the best part of Disney animation since it was bought. The live action remakes are trash tho.

Coulda been good if it was Button 15 years ago, probably would've had his wife and Johnny Depp in there for no reason

Where are the paid critics? There were supposed to be Disney corrupted critics!

Attached: kaboom.jpg (1280x720, 49K)

Disney has to let some of their movies get trashed. Mostly the obviously bad ones. Otherwise the corruption would be too obvious.

Why? They make money regardless of quality since retards will line up in droves to watch it anyway.

I can’t even tell what’s bait here and what’s not anymore

Snyderfags bullshit, just like "critics are biased against DC even though TDK trilogy, Wonder Woman, TTG, Lego Batman and even Batman Ninja got good scores at the same time Snyder movies were fucked"

A Tim Burton movie made in the year 2019 is a complete disaster? I am shocked.

They both also acknowledged the movie has flaws

I randomly got two free tickets for this, so I'm gonna watch it tomorrow. That said, that score is honestly about what I'm expecting. The last Burton movie I saw was Alice in Wonderland, another live action Disney remake, and it was fucking garbage.

Tim Burton hasn't been a good director for years

I think Solo and Wrinkle in Time could have used some of those

Pretty much. It'd more surprising if it were good.

*be more

I don't think it had ever had much hope of success being made into much longer, grimmer and human centric reboot

I'd rather see Tim Burton work on something on like pic related

Attached: disney_214305_1.jpg (559x416, 33K)

It's Disney. Their ONE standard for making a movie is if it makes money. They don't give a single solitary shit how good the movie is, or who they have to bribe in order to sell it.
One of their movies being good is either a happy accident, or the result of someone determining that putting in effort will bring better returns.

Here's the thing though, Disney's live action department has been very hit or miss

More like miss, it had three box office bombs in 2018, big ones. The only thing saving them is nostalgia and capeshit.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nutcracker_and_the_Four_Realms

Budget $120–133 million

Box Office $173.9 million

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Wrinkle_in_Time_(2018_film)

Budget $100–130 million

Box office $132.7 million

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solo:_A_Star_Wars_Story

Budget $275–300 million

Box office $392.9 million

>Grace
How can you trust ANYONE who liked Resident Evil The Final Chapter?
youtu.be/o8l8fzinjBk

Tim Burton is getting repetitive
youtu.be/hJY8vDxRK74

>douge

Attached: 200,000.jpg (590x844, 148K)

>take animated movie about circus life and struggles through the eyes of a young animal featuring other animals
>make it into a movie that's hijacked by humans who barely even feature in the original

Is Johnny Depp and Sarah Bonham Carter in Dumbo?

It saves on CGI costs. Disney needs maximum returns.

Please let this be a sign that they'll stop with these awful live action remakes before its too late...

Helena

i only know 2d dambo as a character. what the fuck is even this. i woulda paid attention if it was a 2d animation tho

Not even a Snyderfag but some of those movie ratings were too high for their worth.

Anyone else think that Disney's situation is more precarious than it appears on the surface?

What is Disney going to do when they run out of animated films to remake?

Me. I've been thinking it for awhile. . This year will be huge for them but it looks like they're throwing everything they can at it. Next year looks a lot more bland

Make sequels. I bet Aladdin gets a King of Thieves live action movies

They also did Alice Through The Looking Glass.

I thought that based on last year's performance combined with them buying out Fox. I think it's going to depend on how well post-Endgame Marvel does.

At least that bombed

Me, sort of. Their SW shit isn't going as well as they hoped, especially merch sales, which was Star Wars' bread and butter. Their animated shows aren't that hot either. Resistance is only hitting 300,000-400,000+ viewers, on the Disney channel. Not even Rebels had that low of viewership in its first season, and that show was on XD.

>Make sequels.
I don't want to say you're right, but I have no doubt they will do that.

Attached: hollywood-debt-chart-2.png (1253x300, 127K)

Yeah, they've been really quiet about Episode 9. I assume it's for Celebration, but you'd think they'd have announced the title earlier.

>Grace Randolph
user, I know you may shitposting... but yeah, she is an entertainer, but not a critique. Don't look for anything beyond a laugh on her commentaries.

That being said, I found her kinda hot. Is the slight lazy eye she have. On some people is hella charming. Also, whenever she speak any sentence it feels like she is making a joke. Is there an american word for that? Slightly raspy but soft.

Pixar was top tier until they started making sequels of their entire backlog. Only ones of those that have been decent are the Toy Story ones and Incredibles 2.

Granted, they're not terrible or anything but I used to go into Pixar movies with much higher expectations. Now the only thing I can trust to be great is the animation.

No pink elephants.

It was doomed from the start.

Why would they, people eat this shit up
We'll never be free of Disney so long as their cultural influence extends so far that they can basically coast by forever on name alone

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-03-26 at 7.54.46 PM.png (264x519, 120K)

Resistance, as shit as it is, airs on Sundays relatively late at night when the target audience should be in bed because there's school tomorrow. They're either sabotaging their own show or they don't really care about TV views, airing it for some likely archaic television rule while instead relying on views on a Disney app or website.

The only way to beat Disney is a moral victory of not giving them your money

Nutcracker, Solo, and A Wrinkle In Time did really badly last year.

Possibly
With their big FOX acquisition, it seems like Disney's corporate strategy is to prioritize momentum over everything else. They safeguard the MCU because it's what pays their bills, but otherwise they pump out as many bland, safe bets as they can to try and keep themselves afloat while they buy more companies to up their stock and eventually become too big to fail

Eh, kinda? Disney is essentially, for better or worse, the opposite of Warners.

Warners makes a large amount of movies with a very diverse set of genres. Most of their films also have reasonable budgets giving them low risk, high reward scenarios basically across the board. They tend to specialize in these low budget Oscar bait movies that oftentimes break out and give them spectacular returns and awards. They oftentimes are the kings of profitability and typically lead all studios from a dollar earned vs dollar spent ratio.

Other than the occasional Pixar movie, Disney has largely abandoned the original film market in favor of leveraging their pop culture status to put out franchise film after franchise film. Their films are almost always high budget blockbusters that either hit big or underperform/bomb to a degree that their losses eat into the profits of their successes. Thing is they can continue on with this model due to their pop culture status and back catalog. But as we've seen in 2018 - where everything of theirs that wasn't capeshit (Marvel/Incredibles) - either underperformed or bombed, there is a limit.

It depends on how 2019 goes. If they have the same result, it could hurt in the long run. Especially since they're sinking so much short term on the Fox acquisition. They'll likely always be profitable, just the degree of profitability and how that affects further downsizing and cost management.

Also before the defense force is triggered, "box office" is before taxes, and before each actor in the industry took their share. Dysney didn't make that money, they take about 40% of it especially when movies are held by China and foreign markets

Then we should probably add Christopher Robin to the list

I forgot there was a Christopher Robin movie. Was it really that forgettable?

Oh yeah. A poor man's Paddington in every possible way

See you at the cinema next month

Critics that hated it said, it wasn't mean-spirited enough and the mouse was replaced by humans

>Paddington
Those were fun movies, how can you fuck up a cute stuffed animals movie? I remember it being about a grown up Christopher, but was it really dour or something?

box office score can no longer be trusted now the we know disney buys their own tickets

Was that ever confirmed though? Not saying it didn't happen since Disney certainly seem scummy like that but is there any grounds to the claim?

These are HUGE successes when compared to Universal's Jem movie..
>Budget $5 Million
>Box Office $2.3 Million

Could have been amazing had they fucking stuck to the source material.

Attached: Jem_and_the_Holograms_(film).png (250x381, 158K)

>These are HUGE successes when compared to Universal's Jem movie..
LOL No. The losses from EACH of those are likely 10x-15x the losses Universal took from Jem. Not only do studios not get the full box office amount a film makes, but there are a ton of other costs (advertising, theater rentals, etc.) that factor into a movie's profitability. With such a low cost, Jem was a basically an accounting blip and writeoff that was easily subsidized by Jurassic World, Furious 7 and Minions.

>Budget $5 Million
That's not a bad budget at all, because it only needed 15 million to be a success.

Honestly, small budget flops aren't terrible, but when your movies cost around 100+ million dollars to make, on production alone, you better hope the do better than make a little more than it's own budget back. At least 2.5 to 3X it's budget.

Mary Poppins too since it was only saved because of the UK.

>These are HUGE successes
No they are not. They are all huge bombs

>I lived to see the day that Jurassic has overtaken Star Wars in box office and merch sales

You know, in hindsight, there's a small part of me that kind of applauds Disney for allowing Rian Johnson to make The Last Jedi. The Force Awakens was exactly the sort of movie I expected Disney to make once they bought Star Wars: bland, safe, boring, coasting on nostalgia from the OT.

The Last Jedi was fucking awful, but it was awful in a DIFFERENT way, a way I never expected Disney to tolerate. Especially compared to the MCU, where they've pretty much settled into a reliable formula for all of their movies. So, even though I hate TLJ and admit that it killed my interest in Star Wars, I do sort of applaud them for being willing to go in such a drastically different direction.

>Their SW shit isn't going as well as they hoped, especially merch sales

how do you kill a brand that managed keep fans after the prequel trilogy.

Are you some kind of moron? Look at the budget of Jem compared to the budget of those other movies. Disney lost way more money on every one of them

I guarantee that a huge chunk of it is due to what TLJ does to Luke. That was some of the ugliest character assassination I've ever seen, all in the name of a shitty twist wrapped around an even shittier Rashomon story. You don't just take the triumphant hero of the OT and do that to him.

Attached: luke-skywalker-main_5a38c454_461eebf5.jpg (768x432, 93K)

I always thought if they remade the one's focused on animals like Bambi, Lion King, Dumbo, and Aristocats. That they would make them like documentaries kinda like that Mermaid and Dragon one.

youtu.be/z4Ed5176TaU

If Disney can't even manage their own properties, buying out Fox will just weigh them down further given the incredibly bloated size of the new entity and it looks like Alan Horn for all the magic he worked at WB has really lost his touch at Disney.

Isn't that more or less the same reason(s) critics hated Disney's Nutcracker? Nonsensical, overstuffed plot held together with obnoxious overuse of CGI?

Does Disney seem to think that audiences are all stunted mental-children who just worship constant plot speeding and overly glittery CG?

Willy del Taco is already making a grimdark Pinocchio as we speak.

Disney? Right now their content is pretty inoffensive and soulless, but they've weathered much worse before and always come out fine.

Netflix on the other hand is going to crash like Enron sometime in the next five years.

>Does it have to do with keeping copyrights
bingo

I'm still mad about the Nutcracker casting a fucking nigger as the actual nutcracker.

I refuse to believe Wrinkle in Time wasn't made to die. It has to be some Hollywood accounting bullshit.

You know it's bad when you piss Hamill off. On the upside the trauma seems to have reinvigorated his career.

If I ever won the lottery I'd buy Star Wars and give it to him.

>If I ever won the lottery I'd buy Star Wars
You'd have to win 10 lotteries just to buy Rey's ingrown toenail.

Avoiding it because Burton hasn't done anything worthwhile since Big Fish, but I'm stuck taking my wife to see Lion King, oh well at least I can look forward to Godzilla

Snarky, maybe?

Which do you guys think Disney treats worse, Star Wars or The Muppets?

>Does Disney seem to think that audiences are all stunted mental-children who just worship constant plot speeding and overly glittery CG?

Have you seen the state of modern hollywood? They'd be right

Attached: Grace Randolph Creed 2 Trailer REACTION.webm (510x390, 170K)

Goddamnit Disney, when are you remaking Song of the South? with the racial climate right now it would be perfect.

Or at least a bluray

The Dumbo story is solid as fuck, what pisses me right the fuck off is the forced human family story like Jesus Christ it has no right to be forced in to the movie like it was.

Muppets easily.

>Hermit Luke milking a sea-sloth for green milk
>And they show it in graphic detail on-screen where in the end you see him drink the stuff
>The weird grunting sounds the sloth makes
>Rey's grossed out look as all this is happening
>Luke smiling and that little bit of milk left on his beard afterwards
If you described that scene to me, I, for sure, would have thought that was a skit from SNL, Family Guy or Robot Chicken, not from an actual Star Wars film and with a major character no less.

Attached: 1416706662955.gif (446x469, 1.17M)

At least the Mickey Mouse shorts are good

>but yeah, she is an entertainer, but not a critique
Rotten Tomatoes says otherwise...and that is why their credibility is where it is, in the can.

It's weird how Disney spends so much money buying out critics for the movies that are basically fine or actually really good and then doesn't devote any resources to salvaging the stinkers. You'd think they'd want to do the opposite. Seems a bit inefficient to me.

Pink elephants are still in the movie, it's just that Dumbo doesn't get wasted to see them.

No the guy is an idiot. They might pull some creative accounting to push a movie a little to pass a milestone like with Black Panther to 700 mill which I think came from coupling it with a new Disney release. But otherwise no.

I'm just imagining the awful Toy Story live-action that's probably in the pipeline after the classics are run through. Will they be real actors or will the toys still be CGI and the family be real actors. Goodness. So many dire possibilities.

They brainwash girls early with the Disney Channel cycling through trash like their tween comedies with a classic or two until they finally submit to any and all trash. Customers for life.

Should've add some trannies.

They just put WAYYYY too much faith in Kathleen Kennedy

I'm not surprised by the reception desu.

I've felt for a while that the MCU is what's keeping Disney alive. I started getting wise to it when I noticed a couple years ago how many in-house Disney productions flopped commercially and critically. The Lone Ranger was probably the wake-up call. Disney clearly wanted another Pirates of the Carribeans style adventure people would love and give them the opportunity for a lot of sequels, and they didn't get that at all.

That day happened over 20 years ago when the first Jurassic Park came out, dumbass. It made more than all the prequels.

I think that between all their acquisitions, park expansions, tentpole franchises, and other expensive decisions, the company is growing bigger in an increasingly top-heavy manner. If it hits, it hits big, but in order to keep afloat, they have to maintain momentum, and at some point, you're bound to see the dice roll poorly. Think of an expansionist empire whose economy runs on plunder and continual conquest.

TLJ is a weird case study in that it wants to be different (and tries to publicize itself as such) and yet also comes off as rather safe. It tries to subvert expectations, but does it rather ineptly compared to ESB, which did the same thing but better. And then it ends the film by going back to the status quo in the OT.

I think a big part of why ESB works but TLJ doesn't is that Vader's just so much better of a villain than Kylo. Think about it: Vader actually, genuinely wins at the end of Empire. He tortures and freezes Han. He batters Luke into submission and then breaks his spirit with the "I AM YOUR FATHER" reveal. He crushes the Rebellion on Hoth. Vader is in almost total control throughout ESB. Meanwhile, Kylo does almost nothing but lose in TLJ. Sure, he kills Snoke, but he gets jerked around by both Snoke and Rey up to that point, and in the aftermath of Rey refusing him, he gets made a fool of by Luke. Kylo is just flat-out not impressive, which is totally different from Darth Vader in ESB.

Attached: it-sounds-like-darth-vader-will-appear-in-the-next-star-wars-movie.jpg (1190x595, 117K)

What also makes Empire work is that while the bad guys do win (on Hoth, it's a tactical Imperial victory, while Vader smacks everyone around), they also, as per one of the main ideas in the story, lose. The Empire wins the battle, but fails to completely destroy the Rebellion, while Vader doesn't get what he wants, and it says a lot watching his body language and overall silence after the Falcon gets away the final time.

The ST as a whole just doesn't work because it feels less like the good guys beating the bad guys than it does the bad guys beating themselves with their own incompetence which outdoes even that of the good guys. At least in the OT, the Rebels were both competent and caught lucky breaks (Luke's making a seemingly impossible shot, Ozzel being as clumsy as he is stupid, Ewoks).

Yup. This is Disney's last big year for cinema. They have three live action adaptations, Captain Marvel, Spider-Man sequel, Avengers finale, Toy Story sequel, Frozen sequel, & Star Wars finale. I think they know the movie-going experience is dying. Nobody wants to watch movies in theaters anymore when in three months the flick will be available for streaming.

Plus, Disney's well of creativity is running dry. Marvel movies aren't going to do as well as they used to now that the characters they feature are pretty much unknown to the everyman. The public is smarter than they anticipated & no longer wants live-action adaptations of animated classics.

Iger's successor is in for disaster.

Poor Netflix. Disney's going to pull all of their stuff, then Warner Bros., & NBC/Universal will likely follow suit. They won't have the library to support high subscription prices. They peaked early so there's only one way they can go.

Made to die? Because of how woke it was?

Shit, this is so true. Right now Disney is like Spain of the corporate world. They come, they take over, & repeat. Iger is great at that, but he plays it too safe.

>I think they know the movie-going experience is dying. Nobody wants to watch movies in theaters anymore
Yea Forums you've been saying this shit for ten years now

>where are the PAID critics

What maes you think Disney actually spent marketing bucks on this movie?

>when compared to

Depends on how you make the comparison.

Actual amount of $$$ lost? Jem comes out on top.

% of budget vs box office gross? Different story.

etc.

Hell, I bet Jem cost less to make than it cost to pay Oprah.

>awful in a DIFFERENT way

That's still awful, user.

white males

>cartoon film
>remove all the cartoony elements
>what's left is a creepy movie about a flying elephant
Wow its almost as if this kind of stuff was animated to begin with

wouldn't put it past them.

>x weekend, Disney gets 90%(?) of box office gross
>buys $10,000,000
>gets $9,000,000
>"spent" $1,000,000 as viral advertising budget
>can also claim to have spent $10,000,000 on "viral marketing" (despote only spending 10% of that) for tax purposes/hollywood accounting.

It makes sense to do this.

But Jurassic Park came out on 1992/1993. Prequels came out in 1997 up.

That’s some really cool made up bullshit you’ve got there

Why does Disney always release an obligatory flop each year ?

>Burton makes movies for WB
>most of them are good
>Burton makes movies for Disney
>all of them are bad

Attached: QWMD4.jpg (407x285, 27K)

TLJ was a series of disappointments for every character in the movie.
And not the big, dramatic frustration of ambition, but tiresome, grinding defeat.
The First Order are all clowns, the Rebels are all fighting over stupid miscommunications and the heroes accomplished nothing of value.
Rey learned nothing about her past. Instead she gets told not to ask questions.
Kylo took power from a weak ruler and changed nothing because his love interest bailed.
Rose and Fin accomplished nothing but making rich people angry.
Luke learns that he was wrong about everything, maybe, kinda. And died.
Leia saw her last resort crumble to dust and her allies die in an agonising low-speed pursuit. They destroyed a big ship, but lost everything to do so.
This shit is what happens if the director doesn’t care to make a movie so much as to blueball the audience.

Sometimes more than just one flop, as shows
Pic related will flop

Attached: 47005056_2183601265017228_2115390020276715520_o-668x334.jpg (668x334, 28K)

Can't wait for the live action Goofy Movie remake

...

Solo is a weird anomaly in terms of bad decisions and production, I wouldn't really consider it part of a trend.
The others do point to a bigger problem with Disney investing way too much in films which don't have the mass appeal to deserve it.

This sort of 'YA book with a weird premise' has never worked in adaptation. Golden Compass was awful and flopped, Mortal Engines was awful and flopped, I don't understand why they keep trying.

It does feel like they are trying to push out all the remakes at once (even Maleficent 2 got pushed to this year). Perhaps future remakes will be released on Disney+ instead.

Please, I just want it to be good, I fucking loved Artemis Fowl when I was a baby boy.
Can it please at least be a decent adaptation? At least show the dwarf blasting processed earth out of his asshole.

I feel like all these startup streaming services by these IP holders are going to flop harder and quicker since what makes Netflix work and be successful is that they have a good selection all in one place. Disney in particular might have trouble hitting all the bases that Netflix does and probably even with their IPs' cultural weight they won't have the clout needed to have a good amount of subscriptions and not enough content for everyone. They're probably looking into streaming as a replacement for home video but still, I don't think that not working with Netflix or any of the other big streaming services will work out for them.

As a fan of the Wrinkle in Time book I wish you good luck

>At least show the dwarf blasting processed earth out of his asshole
An user can dream.

Yeah I don’t know why people pretend like Solo is the new norm for Star Wars. They doubled the budget in production and barely spent any time and effort marketing it. People will still come out in droves for Ep IX, $1.5b easy.

You people really assume that Disney needs profit when very soon they will be taking over the dollar bill. Don't need to make money if they already own the economy.

At least they'll never try to ruin the Bartimaeus Trilogy.
R-Right?

Attached: 160519153518_thegolemseye-front.jpg (500x801, 141K)

As someone who really enjoyed the original novel, I believe the premise was so esoteric and comical that it would only work within a particular medium or with a visionary director.

This'll never work in live action (probably my bias due to the graphic novels), Disney is too safe too late (not creating edgy stuff like Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy anymore) and Brannagh's direction might be too serious. It's gotta suck hard. Sorry. Also, the casting is awful - the one time where "diversity casting" actually works and yet that flies over Lucy Bevan's head that she unintentionally becomes very regressive...

I hate this kind of fantastic literature so much.

But why?

Cool blog post

Thanks!

I can barely remember that.

Attached: Capture-10.jpg (1379x726, 72K)

Me too user, I can't get into that bullshit.

Disney isn’t even the biggest company dumbass

>And then it ends the film by going back to the status quo in the OT.

TFA already did that from the opening crawl

was there really anybody who was seriously looking forward to this or who is shocked that it is probably going to suck?

Or maybe THEY NEVER PAID ANY CROTICS

>before its too late...
Unless they suddenly decide to cancel the 20 other remakes they currently have in production, it's already too late.

>Grace Randolph

Even her captain Marvel review was apogeletic and later made a Captain Marvel challenge. Can’t anger Disney too much

>Pixar and all the live action remakes is whats disgustin

Pixar quality has fallen in the past couple of years. They no longer take the time to polish scripts, instead just throw shit at a wall and hope it sticks

>when he inserted human characters and made Dumbo the useless side character.

They need oscar baiting plus the progressive inserts.

Disney chooses their battles. Like a rotten tomatoes certified critic said once: There’s some movies that you can’t be too harsh or you’ll loose privileges. Of course this works mostly to medium/small publications, you can’t armstrong Variety or THR into submission.

god you're literally the dumbest motherfucker

>excited for a burton movie
>judging a movie based on rotten tomatoes

fuck dude

>Original Dumbo had no story to speak of
>Remake becomes a "cramped canvas" on account of things happening

People are retarded. More news at 11.

>what is reading comprehension

it's a hypothetical model, to illustrate the fact that it works

You seem awfully triggered by it, friend. Might there be a deeper reason perchance for your incipient rage?

I have a feeling it's so they can claim tax write-offs Hollywood accounting style. In fact, I'm willing to bet each of the major studios has at least one intended-to-fail movie each fiscal year.

me too

>turn the lightsaber hand off ending cliffhanger into a comedic gag moment for cheap laughs
The writing was on the wall right here.

cool blog post comment

>This sort of 'YA book with a weird premise' has never worked in adaptation
Hunger Games you retard, aka the movie that launched dozens of imitators.

They should have just recast the actors and adapted the Thrawn Trilogy.

They'd make perfect movies.

It subverted expectations

Ah, an user of culture

I had a dream in my early life of working for Disney as an animator and making the kind of content I loved watching as a child. I went to school to become an animator. Long story short, I saw what living the life of an animator would do to me, so I rejected it. And then I slowly saw Disney mutate into what it is today. It's kind of poetic that I find Disney utterly repulsive to me now. I want nothing more than to live long enough to see its stocks plummet, and to watch them become a dwarf of what it once was. Fuck everything about that company.

>Thrawn Trilogy
Disney already brought Thrawn back, and he gets punked out by an overpowered Jedi Padawan and gets his Star Destroyer, with him and the Padawan in it, sucked into hyperspace by a bunch of space whale-squid who just so happen to naturally enter hyperspace, to an unknown location.

what went wrong?

Attached: 27913E53-1DA3-4C5D-B99C-C52BB8C7E15A.jpg (349x524, 30K)

Game theory: Disney started a trend that other studios would invest in after the good sales, now their shitting out mediocre trash to over saturate the market and make people stray away from live action remakes.

Beauty and the beast had powerful nostalgia and recognition plus Ema Watson

haven't been to the cinema for years