Strange World (WDAS, November 23, 2022)

[filmbuffTX]

Originally Posted by Farerb

It seems that I'll be watching it in theaters after all. The HR manager at my office consulted with me about doing a private screening for the employees and their families. I suggested to her to do a screening of Puss in Boots, but she decided to go with Strange World instead

Strange World is the better choice for your office since it's a standalone film. While Puss in Boots is a sequel/spinoff that requires you to watch 4-5 other movies. I personally haven't seen the first Puss in Boots movie so I have no interest in seeing the sequel. Same with the recent Minions movie. Strange World is also less juvenile and will appeal more to adults.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Poya

This ain't Encanto.

Encanto flopped too. Just not nearly as bad as this movie has.

Originally Posted by brooks101189

Strange World was sunk the moment that first trailer dropped. That teaser was spectacularly awful and they never really recovered from it.

The movie itself also doesn't look that visually asthetically pleasant either. The characters look like the human characters from Smallfoot combined with the human characters from Lorax. It looks ugly.

What makes it worse that this movie comes after the heights Disney reached with Encanto, which is a lighting in a bottle movie Disney Animation has every few years.

Wish is going to crush this. It's the 100th anniversary movie and it's supposed to connect to many of the Disney canon in a way other Disney movies haven't.

Encanto was really low-tier Disney for me. The songs were trying too hard to be like the top 40 radio songs of its day and the animation was rather lackluster. They still can't get humans to look right in 3D/CGI animation. Strange World is the better film. By a long mile too.

Originally Posted by Patricier21

How far back do you think? Because all the Lego movies are actually quite good, as are still the Pixar movies overall, and even pretty much all of Disney overall too. I still see animated movies are just as good or better than most live-action movies these days, and I say yes still more better and valuable than most movies that came out back in the day and that are considered classics, at least in my own opinion

Probably 2003, if I'm being honest. They have had some genuinely decent films since then, but nothing that I would say I love like their past works. The movies are just too cookie-cutter and bland with no real storytelling to speak of. Their days at the top are long gone, I'm afraid.

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Right? Something about low taxes, friendly business environments and not shutting down everything over a head cold.

So, this Strange World movie sort of bombed then? Guess it was either too strange or not strange enough.

Nah. It was plenty strange enough. There just wasn't enough world in it. Everything these days has to have a lot of world it in. Whether it be actually or in the storytelling via "world-building".

Originally Posted by Kuja

But there are plenty of 1 year-olds and older who grow up with LGBT parents or relatives, or who have friends with LGBT parents... As someone said earlier, children understand more than patronizing adults would like them to.

This film flopped for a multitude of reasons--modeling it after similar flop sci-fi films they've made in the past like Treasure Planet & Atlantis, an ugly design aesthetic, little and poor marketing, training people to see their animated films at home via streaming rather than in theaters, etc. A secondary LGBT character wasn't one of them. Most people who would've hated that have been boycotting Disney since the '90s.

[Show spoiler]That's why I said before that this film flopping isn't too concerning since the genre is not one WDAS has had much if any success with. Disney likely knew it was a gamble, too, since they didn't market it much and put it out beside a sure hit like Wakanda Forever. Now if Wish flops next Fall despite being a princess film (their bread and butter) with the 100th anniversary extra marketing push behind it and the fact that it looks and sounds great so far at that, then I'd actually be concerned for WDAS

.

But was that "small" and "little" backstory to the secondary character necessary? I think not. It just feels shoehorned in to tick off boxes and look like they're important. In other words, pandering. And of the worst kind. It's funny, as I was actually thinking about this the other day when I was listening to the new 30th anniversary remastered box set of Wish by The Cure. Here is an album that was made on its own terms and yet found a huge audience without manipulating or "pandering" to its audience. You, as the audience had to meet the album on its own terms.

The Cure never set out to win an audience or try to get more people into them. They made art first and foremost. I don't think that Strange World did that. Entirely, at least. They, as in Disney, still feel the need to do a little pandering. Doesn't always make for great art. Despite all of that, I still think Strange World is one of their best in a long, LONG time. And there is much to love about it. Just wish Disney wouldn't be "Disney".

Originally Posted by sandman slim

And yet people like you have absolutely no problem with the prince kissing the princess or the cute young (straight) couple holding hands or the boy dog & girl dog having a date & sharing a piece of spaghetti. Straight sexuality is a part of pretty much every movie ever made, animated films included, and no one has ever had a problem with it. But let one character say "I'm gay" and the whining & pearl clutching goes into overdrive.

We're here, we're queer, we ain't going anywhere, get over it.

The problem with what you are saying is that all these "hetero" movies are not blatantly "hetero". And in the case of the animated movies you mention, they aren't. They are not anything. To try to put a label on it isn't good. The couple is just a couple. Nothing more. Also, that last sentence is very problematic. It is a wonderful sentiment and a nice idea, but that's not how reality works. You cannot force yourself or who you are onto anyone else. In other words, if someone does not like you, they don't have to. Not everyone has to like you. Or for that matter accept you. So saying that people HAVE to get used to it isn't really true.

As long as they are not crossing the line with their dislike and non-acceptance, there isn't anything that can be done. I've never understood people's need to be liked by everybody and be accepted by everybody. I live my life unapologetically and don't care what someone else thinks. Much less strangers who don't amount to anything in my life. But I may be different in how I see things. Thanks for reading and understanding. Hope your Thanksgiving was good.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by sandman slim

And yet people like you have absolutely no problem with the prince kissing the princess or the cute young (straight) couple holding hands or the boy dog & girl dog having a date & sharing a piece of spaghetti. Straight sexuality is a part of pretty much every movie ever made, animated films included, and no one has ever had a problem with it. But let one character say "I'm gay" and the whining & pearl clutching goes into overdrive.

We're here, we're queer, we ain't going anywhere, get over it.

Go ahead, its a free country - but some people dont care to watch such things or would prefer to not have their kids see certain things at a young age. Its not whining or pearl clutching, thats just what you call it. You have to understand that something that is not very common might not appeal to the masses. Thats not the masses fault, despite what some may believe.

The studios have to weigh it all out and determine if producing content with certain themes is worth it or not. Thats up to them since they have to deal with poor performances at the box office. I suspect this film had numerous other issues as evident by reviews and what Ive read here. It isnt just some sexuality themes that caused the problems although they didnt seem to help. If the movie really rocked then I suspect it might have worked out better overall.

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

The problem with what you are saying is that all these "hetero" movies are not blatantly "hetero". And in the case of the animated movies you mention, they aren't. They are not anything. To try to put a label on it isn't good. The couple is just a couple. Nothing more. Also, that last sentence is very problematic. It is a wonderful sentiment and a nice idea, but that's not how reality works. You cannot force yourself or who you are onto anyone else. In other words, if someone does not like you, they don't have to. Not everyone has to like you. Or for that matter accept you. So saying that people HAVE to get used to it isn't really true.

As long as they are not crossing the line with their dislike and non-acceptance, there isn't anything that can be done. I've never understood people's need to be liked by everybody and be accepted by everybody. I live my life unapologetically and don't care what someone else thinks. Much less strangers who don't amount to anything in my life. But I may be different in how I see things. Thanks for reading and understanding. Hope your Thanksgiving was good.

YES! Bolded comment is perfect. Everyone can do as they please and be whatever they wish to be. But, neither me nor anyone has to embrace it, accept it or watch content with things in it that dont appeal to us. That doesnt make us bad people or anything else. We just dont care to watch certain things. No one has to get used to anything, other than death and taxes which none of us can avoid. .

Nice post, fightthefuture.

[sandman slim]

[fighthefutureofhd]

Laugh as much as you want. Laughing is good for the soul. That doesn't make any of what we said any less true. Or any less accurate or right. Facts be what the facts be. Can't make anyone like or accept you.

[terp_fan99]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Encanto was really low-tier Disney for me. The songs were trying too hard to be like the top 40 radio songs of its day and the animation was rather lackluster. They still can't get humans to look right in 3D/CGI animation. Strange World is the better film. By a long mile too.

I thought Encanto was OKAY, but the music was vastly overrated. The choruses were catchy and that's what everyone remembers, but the songs overall were awful and shoved way too much character development/backstory into the verses.

[eightslicesofpie]

Sad that I missed this opening weekend, hoping there are still some convenient showtimes of this and Bones & All this weekend I can make

[Kuja]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

The Cure never set out to win an audience or try to get more people into them.

As has been mentioned before, the LGBT character wasn't marketed, so not sure what you're referring to?

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

The problem with what you are saying is that all these "hetero" movies are not blatantly "hetero".

I'm not sure what this means. I don't think Ethan even has a kiss with his crush (much less do they get married at the end) like nearly every straight couple in the first 40-some films in WDAS canon do, lol. Even 12-year-old characters like Taran and Eilonwy in The Black Cauldron smooch and Mowgli is lured to human civilization because of a pretty face at the end of The Jungle Book. And many are shown having children, being pregnant, showing attraction to someone, etc. This is clearly not an even standard you're applying.

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

But was that "small" and "little" backstory to the secondary character necessary? I think not.

Did Ursula have to be purple? Did Aladdin have to show his abs in the whole movie? Did Aurora's hair have to end in curly lines? What a random way to rationalize why a character should be changed from being an identity you don't like. The character is as the writers envisioned him, what you're asking for is censorship.

Anyway, having seen the film myself, I don't agree that it's shoehorned in at all, it's a detail that highlights the difference (and conflict) in the three generations of the family that is the main focus of the film.

[jess1581]

Lovely argument. All I'm gonna say is this. Regardless of what a film is trying to convey, no film, no production, no cast, and no studio is OWED an audience. You create entertainment and hope it finds an audience. That's the luck of the draw in Hollywood. Once upon a time creators took failure with way more humility. Now it's just pathetic pouting and tantrums.

So yeah cool, you're here, you're queer, you're not going anywhere, and audiences just don't care.

[filmbuffTX]

People keep saying the marketing was bad, but by what metric? We have no idea exactly what they spent on marketing compared to other films. Should they have started the marketing earlier? Maybe so. There was definitely less merchandising than Lightyear, but that's a given since Lightyear is part of an existing IP that already has a bunch of merchandising. I remember Lightyear even having its own cereal that was made by Kellogg's. I feel like blaming the marketing might just be a generic thing people do when any high profile movie underperforms. Maybe people knew about the film, but just didn't care knowing they could stream it soon? The pandemic changed a lot of people's viewing habits. Also people don't watch as much traditional TV, so TV ads aren't as effective. Same goes for newspaper/magazine print ads.

I spotted another billboard yesterday. I'm constantly seeing ads for this movie.

[Kuja]

Likewise this film--and its LGBT character--are also going nowhere, which I think is the part that's upsetting to some. If it was simply this one film that those were bothered by, they would be satisfied that it flopped. No, it's a larger "culture war" that this film is only one piece of for them that is bothering some people, that we all know isn't simply going to go away with one film's performance. LGBT characters aren't going to up and vanish from cinema now even though some wish that would be the result.

And, moreover, a new generation of children will still be growing up with Strange World and who knows, it may even develop a cult fanbase over time the way films like Treasure Planet, Robin Hood, The Black Cauldron, etc. did. It's not like when a random studio's animated film flops and falls off the radar of the public, all these films will be on Disney+ for its lifetime, which is slowly becoming the dominant streaming service in the U.S. Reminds me of the way my sister and I grew up with the clamshell-esque VHS cassettes of all the Disney Animated Classics available to watch any time as children.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by filmbuffTX

People keep saying the marketing was bad, but by what metric? We have no idea exactly what they spent on marketing compared to other films. Should they have started the marketing earlier? Maybe so. There was definitely less merchandising than Lightyear, but that's a given since Lightyear is part of an existing IP that already has a bunch of merchandising. I remember Lightyear even having its own cereal that was made by Kellogg's. I feel like blaming the marketing might just be a generic thing people do when any high profile movie underperforms. Maybe people knew about the film, but just didn't care knowing they could stream it soon? The pandemic changed a lot of people's viewing habits. Also people don't watch as much traditional TV, so TV ads aren't as effective. Same goes for newspaper/magazine print ads.

I spotted another billboard yesterday. I'm constantly seeing ads for this movie.

Overall the marketing was pretty understated. I'm surprised people aren't calling Disney out for hanging this film out to dry.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by Kuja

Likewise this film--and its LGBT character--are also going nowhere, which I think is the part that's upsetting to some. If it was simply this one film that those were bothered by, they would simply be satisfied that it flopped. No, it's a larger culture war that this film is only one piece of for them that is bothering some people, that we all know isn't simply going to go away with one film's performance. LGBT characters aren't going to up and vanish from cinema now even though some would wish that would be the result.

And, moreover, a new generation children will still be growing up with Strange World and who knows, it may even develop a cult fanbase over time the way films like Treasure Planet, Robin Hood, The Black Cauldron, etc. did. It's not like when a random studio's animated film flops and falls off the radar, all these films will be on Disney+ for its lifetime, which is slowly becoming the dominant streaming service in the U.S.

And I hope it does. I'm gonna catch this when it comes to D+ so I can have my own assessment on it.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Kuja

As has been mentioned before, the LGBT character wasn't marketed, so not sure what you're referring to?

It doesn't have to be marketed. It is not even about the marketing. It's about the art itself. This was clearly shoehorned in to pander. It had nothing to do with marketing. When I mentioned the example of the Cure's Wish, I was talking the final product. The actual art. They didn't make something that was pandering or manipulating. Disney, on the other hand, feels it has to pander with its art these days and that's not good art. Thankfully, the pandering didn't ruin this film.

Originally Posted by Kuja

I'm not sure what this means. I don't think Ethan even has a kiss with his crush (much less do they get married at the end) like nearly every straight couple in the first 40-some films in WDAS canon do, lol. Even 12-year-old characters like Taran and Eilonwy in The Black Cauldron smooch and Mowgli is lured to human civilization because of a pretty face at the end of The Jungle Book. And many are shown having children, being pregnant, showing attraction to someone, etc. This is clearly not an even standard you're applying.

I don't know what movies you're seeing, but there are few that showing the two leads marrying. And pregnant? Not hardly. Don't know a cartoon movie where people are pregnant.

Originally Posted by Kuja

Did Ursula have to be purple? Did Aladdin have to show his abs in the whole movie? Did Aurora's hair have to end in curly lines? What a random way to rationalize why a character should be changed from being an identity you don't like. The character is as the writers envisioned him, what you're asking for is censorship.

None of those things are the same and you know that. Most of those are basic genetic traits and are absolutely nothing. Characteristics, if you will. Not shoehorned pandering. And that last sentence is quite the leap in logic. There is no asking of censorship. I just would like my art to not pander to me or try knowingly manipulate me. It's bad art and I don't like it.

Originally Posted by Kuja

Anyway, having seen the film myself, I don't agree that it's shoehorned in at all, it's a detail that highlights the difference (and conflict) in the three generations of the family that is the main focus of the film.

Then you may need your eyes checked cause it was blatant pandering. It was not hard to miss. It was an unnecessary detail that had nothing to do with the plot or forward it along. And it's not really about him being gay. The same could be said if it was a girl he was crushing on. The problem here in this case is that they made it too obvious and it stuck out horribly. It didn't mess with the movie THAT much, but it is a knock against an otherwise great film.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Laugh as much as you want. Laughing is good for the soul. That doesn't make any of what we said any less true. Or any less accurate or right. Facts be what the facts be. Can't make anyone like or accept you.

[MazeRunner]

So how soon until we get this on digital

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by Mikezilla3k

I honestly have zero interest in Secret Of NIMH.

[Monterey Jack]

This movie's a C+ at best (and that's being generous). Some of the environments and creatures are creative, but the characters are bland, and the ultimate plot reveal lacks the "Wow" factor that was obviously intended. Along with Lightyear, another Disney turkey.

[VikingHead2000]

It’s the biggest failure for Disney and I love it. It’s already lost over a $100 million already.

[Hardback247]

Originally Posted by VikingHead2000

It’s the biggest failure for Disney and I love it. It’s already lost over a $100 million already.

You take pleasure from a movie's suffering?