What do you guys think is the reason the MCU/Disney is failing?

[Iggy Wolf]

I mean, money wise, I'm sure you can say they're still doing financially well, but in terms of their movies pulling the same numbers and interest as the Infinity Saga, they've obviously been lacking. So I'm curious to hear people's thoughts here as to why that is and what people think are the reasons for their poor reception.

[The nameless Gamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

I hate Disney's obsession with re-releasing bastardised versions of classic cartoons, why can't they just make brand new hand drawn animations like the good old days?

Two reasons: 1) They'd have to hire actually competent people to do the animation. 2) They ran out of European fairy tales and folklore to rip off.

[Adversary]

Audiences are getting sick of the DEI ♥♥♥♥. Hollywood doesn't give a damn though, they get paid by Blackrock and Klaus Schwab either way. It's the same with gaming, comics, cartoons, you name it if it's got some commie ♥♥♥♥ shilling DEI then the audience is getting pretty sick of it.

These dumb ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ whose sole goal in life is establishing one world communism are in for one hell of a rude wakeup call.

[The nameless Gamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Adversary:

Audiences are getting sick of the DEI ♥♥♥♥. Hollywood doesn't give a damn though, they get paid by Blackrock and Klaus Schwab either way. It's the same with gaming, comics, cartoons, you name it if it's got some commie ♥♥♥♥ shilling DEI then the audience is getting pretty sick of it.

These dumb ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ whose sole goal in life is establishing one world communism are in for one hell of a rude wakeup call.

Black Rock is a CORPORATION. Corporations only exist in capitalism.

[𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

I hate Disney's obsession with re-releasing bastardised versions of classic cartoons, why can't they just make brand new hand drawn animations like the good old days?

Two reasons: 1) They'd have to hire actually competent people to do the animation. 2) They ran out of European fairy tales and folklore to rip off.

with Disneys wealth and influence they could very easily focus on original cartoons if they wanted to, even when theres nothing left to rip off, they could hire the best storytellers in the world easily. They just choose not to and only focus on forgettable cgi movies and live action abominations as those are easier to cash in on.

[The nameless Gamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

Two reasons: 1) They'd have to hire actually competent people to do the animation. 2) They ran out of European fairy tales and folklore to rip off.

with Disneys wealth and influence they could very easily focus on original cartoons if they wanted to, even when theres nothing left to rip off, they could hire the best storytellers in the world easily. They just choose not to and only focus on forgettable cgi movies and live action abominations as those are easier to cash in on.

Well, to make something original, they'd need to hire actually imaginative and creative people with actual ideas and writing skills. Modern Disney is all business, no art. Worse, business detached from its target audience. Does modern Disney even have a target audience? Or are they just throwing random movies at the wall and see what sticks?
Edit: that's why the anime industry is as successful as it is - each genre has a specific target audience. They know what they're making and who they're making it for.

[Adversary]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Adversary:

Audiences are getting sick of the DEI ♥♥♥♥. Hollywood doesn't give a damn though, they get paid by Blackrock and Klaus Schwab either way. It's the same with gaming, comics, cartoons, you name it if it's got some commie ♥♥♥♥ shilling DEI then the audience is getting pretty sick of it.

These dumb ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ whose sole goal in life is establishing one world communism are in for one hell of a rude wakeup call.

Black Rock is a CORPORATION. Corporations only exist in capitalism.

I'm pretty sure that cronyism nor corporatism isn't capitalism, given how monopolistic and anticompetitive they tend to be. Especially when you factor in vertical monopolies. Plus, Blackrock is an investment firm and they are balls deep in this DEI nonsense. Complete with a scale which determines how much money companies get based on how willing they are to comply with their radical agenda.

Plus, it's one of the many companies that comprise the 99% of wealth and business owned by the 200 people that make up the BIlderberg Group. That doesn't seem like a for the people, by the people situation. But then again, communism was never about that to begin with.

It's about taking what is private and making it public. Making everything owned and operated by the state and taking it away from the body public. From the people, as it were, to the hands of a bunch of greedy elite. As it always was, mein kamarad.

Don't piss on my leg and say it's rain. Instead, actually learn what your religion - communism - is about. And perhaps consider repenting. Actually understand what Marx, Engels, and their various disciples like Lincoln, Stalin, Hitler, Musellini, Zedong, Pot and the like were on about.

Until then, don't @ me bro.

[The nameless Gamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Adversary:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

Black Rock is a CORPORATION. Corporations only exist in capitalism.

I'm pretty sure that cronyism nor corporatism isn't capitalism, given how monopolistic and anticompetitive they tend to be. Especially when you factor in vertical monopolies. Plus, Blackrock is an investment firm and they are balls deep in this DEI nonsense. Complete with a scale which determines how much money companies get based on how willing they are to comply with their radical agenda.

Plus, it's one of the many companies that comprise the 99% of wealth and business owned by the 200 people that make up the BIlderberg Group. That doesn't seem like a for the people, by the people situation. But then again, communism was never about that to begin with.

It's about taking what is private and making it public. Making everything owned and operated by the state and taking it away from the body public. From the people, as it were, to the hands of a bunch of greedy elite. As it always was, mein kamarad.

Don't piss on my leg and say it's rain. Instead, actually learn what your religion - communism - is about. And perhaps consider repenting. Actually understand what Marx, Engels, and their various disciples like Lincoln, Stalin, Hitler, Musellini, Zedong, Pot and the like were on about.

Until then, don't @ me bro.

You named it properly yourself in this post: corporatism. You seem to be rather knowledgeable, albeit a little rough with words. Don't mislabel things. And I would humbly suggest using more refined language. It gives arguments more weight. And YOU don't seem to be the one who understands Marx. Marx' ultimate idea was that society doesn't NEED to be governed but it would be made up of WORKERS who don't need a regulative body above them. But that's material for a discussion elsewhere. This one is about an entertainment company.

[The nameless Gamer]

Now that I think of it, the people criticizing Disney have their own weird episodes. I heard about the "Lightyear" buzz (pun partially intended). It was a pretty loud outcry against "woke propaganda". I thought: "What kind of snogging and groping between two girls must be going on in that piece?" And then I dug a little. People were getting upset over one light peck on the lips . Talk about making the Kilimanjaro out of an anthill.

[Tito Shivan]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

Now that I think of it, the people criticizing Disney have their own weird episodes. I heard about the "Lightyear" buzz (pun partially intended). It was a pretty loud outcry against "woke propaganda". I thought: "What kind of snogging and groping between two girls must be going on in that piece?" And then I dug a little. People were getting upset over one light peck on the lips . Talk about making the Kilimanjaro out of an anthill.

Because there's a whole business about harvesting hate clicks and views online. And what better way to get yourself SEO'd into the top than to attach your ragebaiting content to the latest blockbuster title of the month.
As the meme says:

“We Paid a Freelancer to Say a Thing You Like Is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Because the Google-Facebook Duopoly Ate the Whole Digital Ad Market and Now Harvesting Hate Clicks Is the Only Viable Business Model for Online Media”

[The nameless Gamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Tito Shivan:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

Now that I think of it, the people criticizing Disney have their own weird episodes. I heard about the "Lightyear" buzz (pun partially intended). It was a pretty loud outcry against "woke propaganda". I thought: "What kind of snogging and groping between two girls must be going on in that piece?" And then I dug a little. People were getting upset over one light peck on the lips . Talk about making the Kilimanjaro out of an anthill.

Because there's a whole business about harvesting hate clicks and views online. And what better way to get yourself SEO'd into the top than to attach your ragebaiting content to the latest blockbuster title of the month.
As the meme says:

“We Paid a Freelancer to Say a Thing You Like Is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Because the Google-Facebook Duopoly Ate the Whole Digital Ad Market and Now Harvesting Hate Clicks Is the Only Viable Business Model for Online Media”

So, am I correct to assume that the model is: "Any kind of attention is good, as long as it gets attention to begin with?"

[Ulfrinn]

When you've pre-determined you do not like a group of people, then direct your comment in a manner that is intended to antagonize those groups of people, just so you can claim any kind of criticism of your content is some kind of proof that those people you didn't like were subhuman anyway, that level of toxicity is a great way to turn away customers, and it encompasses modern Disney's current business model. To the point South Park made fun of them, Disney threw a temper tantrum over it, tried to silence them over it failed, lost that lawsuit, and South Park laughed at them even harder. They are their own joke at this point.

[Ulfrinn]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

I hate Disney's obsession with re-releasing bastardised versions of classic cartoons, why can't they just make brand new hand drawn animations like the good old days?

Two reasons: 1) They'd have to hire actually competent people to do the animation. 2) They ran out of European fairy tales and folklore to rip off.

True that, then they started ripping off other ones. Middle Easter, Chinese, Shakespeare. In terms of content, they've never been all that original and there's only so much public domain stuff you can hijack for free.

[Sidakte]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Iggy Wolf:

I mean, money wise, I'm sure you can say they're still doing financially well, but in terms of their movies pulling the same numbers and interest as the Infinity Saga, they've obviously been lacking. So I'm curious to hear people's thoughts here as to why that is and what people think are the reasons for their poor reception.

lack of creativity.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The nameless Commander:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

I hate Disney's obsession with re-releasing bastardised versions of classic cartoons, why can't they just make brand new hand drawn animations like the good old days?

Two reasons: 1) They'd have to hire actually competent people to do the animation. 2) They ran out of European fairy tales and folklore to rip off.

👌

[Devsman]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Tito Shivan:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Holografix:

it's not the same experience.

Sure it's not. I don't get the noisy kids nor the idiot browsing their phone in de dark or having a call in the middle of the movie. I don't get to pay for some popcorn and a coke the equivalent of a dinner or having to miss part of the movie because i have to go to the loo.

I've watched the last 4 marvel movies at home and it was a more comfortable experience than the last average blockbuster movie nights. I may miss screen size, but I'm winning on a lot of things in exchange.

Movie theatres have gone a looong way to degrade the movie theatre experience over the years (And I've been a really hardcore cinema moviegoer)...

The main reason I still go to the big screen like once a year is actually the audio. Small screen releases badly need a more normalized mix, even if it's like a setting in the options menu or something. Because as it is, you get to choose between turning on captions, just missing dialog completely, or waking up people in freakin' Nebraska when something actiony happens.

[Devsman]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย 𝓒𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓽 🥕:

I hate Disney's obsession with re-releasing bastardised versions of classic cartoons, why can't they just make brand new hand drawn animations like the good old days? why do they have to ruin movies I grew up with and start race swapping classic princesses and adding wokeness into everything? tarnishing the classic movies with gut wrenchingly horrible live action remakes.

I heard theres pretty much a confirmed leak from a producer on Zootopia 2. Zootopia goes by the phrase of "anyone can be anything"

well I am crapping myself. I just know they are going to butcher my favourite movie franchise and turn it into a shameless political woke push and turn Judy in to some LGBT feminist icon and have the entire movie about pushing that agenda rather than solving any mysteries and crimes.

I don't get this "ruined it" mentality. Aladdin is still the best Disney movie (not counting the stuff that came with the Pixar purchase) even if there's a really bad remake of it that I have no intention of ever watching.

Also I dunno how to tell you this but Zootopia 1 was already that. Did you miss the part where the little mouse thing was transracial, or the part where the lion was a vegan, or the part where the bad guy was literally the only white character in the movie?