2 / 15
Mar 24

This has been boring holes in my brain ever since some random person on YouTube pointed it out...so if you've been paying attention, you may have noticed a pattern with some of Disney's recent releases. And by 'Disney' I mean the whole Disney/Marvel/Star Wars/whatever else content megaplex. Anyway, observe:

Step 1: Begin production of some needless remake or spinoff or other form of eye-slop that nobody really asked for, cutting all the usual corners with the writing and directing and visuals to get as much content as possible out of whatever's left of the budget after all the A-list celebrities have been paid.

Step 2: Cast a woman in the starring role (bonus points if it's a woman of color), and draw attention to this in some fashion with the promotional campaign. Either market the project as a "girlboss" ultra-feminist (performative allyship...) bonanza that is so unique and brave and a must-watch because there is a woman in the starring role, OR, if you're going the remake route, replace what was originally a white woman with a WoC.

Step 3: Get all the misogynists and/or racists to scream and wail and gnash their teeth and start harassment campaigns and send death threats to the poor starlet you've shoved into the middle of this mess. For even more bonus points, convince slightly-less-unhinged people to actively defend your eye-slop against these harassment campaigns, on the basis that you're being "progressive" and spotlighting marginalized demographics, and for that you deserve to be lauded as our savior...

Step 4: Once the first episode/trailer of this project releases and the general public has their "...oh" moment and begins to realize that it is indeed eye-slop, stoke the flames. Get the bigots to follow the project religiously, picking apart every frame to 'prove' that it's indicative of the downfall of society (and milk their outrage-addicted audiences for as long as possible), and get the defenders to argue that only a bigot would find fault with your wonderful generous progressive content, and that 'good' people need to support you and consume product even harder to compensate.

Step 5: Profit...???

...I'm sure you get it. So what do you think; is this by design...?

  • Yes
  • No

22voters

Personally, I'm definitely beginning to feel like this is happening on purpose. Especially after this vicious cycle was taken to new heights with the recent Snow White...thing. I really don't give a damn about the movie (that hairstyle is definitely a hate-crime though...curly bobs are some of the cutest hairstyles on god's green earth, you have to TRY to make one look that ugly), but I definitely did notice how vitriolic the discourse got this time around, and how much of that vitriol actually reached my feeds. It felt like Disney went out of their way to use their promotion (and the public comments of the 'starlet' in question) to make as many people as possible as angry as possible on a regular basis.

Almost as if...that anger, in and of itself, WAS the promotion. As if they knew it would be another ugly CGI flop that no one cared about, and decided to farm clicks and engagement while they could by showing that off at every opportunity. As if they're no longer (primarily) in the business of making entertaining films and shows, but rather in the business of making ~content~ that grabs people's attention by any means necessary.

And on the internet, that means making people mad. And historically, what makes people more mad than placing women and PoC in prominent places where they "don't belong"...?

^That's the part that really grinds my gears. T_T The idea that they're using these (usually B-list or lower...gee, wonder why) stars as scapegoats in the culture wars, knowing how viciously the public will attack them, and wanting it to happen so they can save a few cents on advertising.
The idea that they're willing to keep throwing bones to the "go woke go broke" crowd frothing at the mouth for more of this eye-slop to prove their point, making media discussion and criticism hellish for everyone else, because it's easier than writing stories with substance, or employing creative directors who are willing to try.

And worst of all, the idea that they're forcing their employees to bear the brunt of all this drama, twisting it into a matter of pride or righteousness that they should feel personally responsible for.
I remember reading a very depressing excerpt from an interview from Daisy Ridley about being cast for the Star Wars sequel trilogy, and all the pressure the staff heaped onto her about how """important""" the role was and how she was becoming part of a legacy and all that garbage...

...All of that for a "trilogy" the directors were making up as they went. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ But of course, the higher-ups don't have to care about the quality of the product, because they know all the hatred and disappointment from the fans will be offloaded onto their sacrificial lambs. To this day, I STILL have to see .pngs of Rey screaming on YouTube thumbnails; it's been a damn decade and this actress' face is still associated with the failure of a project that would have sucked no matter who starred in it.

...So yeah, I just wanted to get that off my chest. Really, this is just another example of capitalism ruining art, but I felt it was particularly notable because of Disney's influence on the cultural zeitgeist.
Do you agree with this, do you disagree...? Whether it's on purpose or not, do you think it'll stop soon, or do you think Disney will go on pathetically feeding this cycle until the novelty finally wears off...?

Please be civil in your replies; and don't fall for the rage-bait while composing them...this discussion is about whether or not a corporation is complicit in a phenomenon, not about whether some individual is more complicit and we need to be blaming them instead.

  • created

    3d
  • last reply

    2d
  • 14

    replies

  • 235

    views

  • 10

    users

  • 13

    likes

  • 1

    link

I can definitely see how they might use this strategy but I think they're just idiots, tbh. The people at the top, so the ones who only care about profits and don't know how to make a good movie, think they know what people want--"woke" stuff. Because they're ghouls who only care about money, none of their attempts to be inclusive come off as sincere or work in the slightest and we get crap like Snow White.

No hate to the actress, btw. And I don't think they just pick B-listers for their scheming purposes, I think they just go with whoever's popular at the time. Rachel Zegler had just done West Side Story and was working on that Hunger Games prequel when she was cast, if I remember correctly, so she was popular. It's still vile the way they practically throw them to the wolves though, especially since it clearly affected her career.

In general, I just think the producers probably have too much of a say in what's put out. As far as them learning their lesson, that's unlikely. It's more likely they'll veer off and try other trends in an attempt to not go broke. None of their latest projects can really be called profitable and they're not even bringing in awards like they used to. Or they might start firing enough people that things change. I just don't see studio executives as the sort to learn lessons, lol.

Your post reminded me of this video1, specifically the part around 7:30.

I can't say for certain whether or not Disney (or any other company) is doing this on purpose, but I wouldn't be surprised either way.

Whether they're meticulous trolls or bumbling and out of touch, it's making them money, so they keep doing it. It's particularly sad when it involves unknown actors. It feels like setting up some regular person to be hate-crimed for a quick buck.

Your point about "throwing bones to the 'go woke go broke' crowd is really interesting to me. The performative allyship can still be a little grating, but I don't think it would be half as big of an issue if they didn't cut corners with the writing either. It makes bigots feel like they're right and puts media activist types on the defensive.

The few times I follow up on kinds of movies, there always seems to be some really bizarre writing choices. Not every movie has to be a masterpiece or even good, but I'm talking about mistakes that the most basic, by-the-numbers movie would manage to avoid.

The 'go woke go broke' crowd and the kind of people who watch media based on representation aren't going to be swayed no matter what happens, but I wonder what the average person is going to take away from all of this...

Nothing that deep. The suits said, "Live action Snow White!" Their bean counters consulted with their algorithms and calculated the best people to get the maximum possible return on producing the movie. Then they passed it on to the people making the movie.

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

They just need to make STAR WARS good again how Rogue One was made. And they need to film Doctor Who how it was filmed back in the 70's and 80's.STAR WARS needs more creatures, and a new DEATH SATR also the cig ships should be in space not on the ground, and the fantasy back to make it good again. It's ok to bring back the old cast just make a fun movie this time around. Focus more on stories then fx. Doctor Who works well with multi Doctors, and involves the show's long history in the new show is also important how Moffat wrote some of those stories during the last of Matt Smith's season, and Capaldi's last season was fun to watch.

They are trying to make meme-able content and actively disregarding quality, but don't underestimate the depths of their arrogance and incompetence. In the era of streaming, memetic media that gets views by any means necessary is beating out quality media that people will watch repeatedly, as was the case in the VHS and DVD era.

Meanwhile, executives are simultaneously highly insulated from commercial failures while being vulnerable to being ousted for insufficient wokeness - corporate wokeness is mostly a byzantine code for otherwise incompetent upper class aspirants to use to unseat their superiors. Corporate flacks jump over themselves to push unpopular projects, the more unpopular the better. Then they spend their remaining time sniping the other executives and jockeying amongst themselves.

That's how Kathleen Kennedy got her position, and countless underlings as well. That this system produces miserable films and negative profits is only an annoying speed bump to them.

Come on man, it's marketing. Definitely draws attention.

The way Disney's been so egregiously sabotaging themselves over the past several years by destroying their most lucrative IPs and putting out slop nobody even wanted to begin with, it's easy to interpret it as some sort of deliberate rage-baiting ploy, because what else could it possibly be, right?

But....WHY would they do THAT though? They're a multi-billion dollar company with all the resources in the WORLD available to them. They care first and foremost about making bank, just like every other media conglomerate, right? Then why not just make the kind of good, high-quality stuff that the fans of their IPs ACTUALLY want, recover their brand image, and watch the billions pour in and their yearly revenue skyrocket from there? THAT would be in their best interests to do in this situation.

If this indeed some kind of rage-baiting conspiracy made to draw attention to their projects, it's a pretty stupid one that's harming not only themselves, but everyone who's ever enjoyed or valued their IPs (Marvel, Star Wars, etc(

Reading this thread makes me think it is an issue rooted in Disney themselves. How the company was built, how people was staffed and how nothing has changed for 100 years. The things that go behind the scenes were probably seeping through the movies we see Disney in. New people get hired every time someone is feed up with Disney and eventually, you have people who don't know what they're doing or people that are being taken advantage of. I guess it's what happens when a company exist for so long. I don't think we'll see anything change any time soon or even in the next 100 years. However, one thing's for sure, they've "monopolized" the industry and nobody can compete with them.

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

Honestly, I don't think they're rage-baiting, if they are, they're doing it unintentionally. Likely, Disney is relying on a formula they think will cause them to hit the jackpot. Male leads are taboo nowadays, so they better opt for a female lead. If the movie does have a female love interest, she has to have a bigger role (Princess Jasmine). So many female leads in recent movies are basically the same character, just in a different font.

I've read a lot of "hate" comments. The "hate" isn't because people hate women or more melanated people. A lot of hate stems from the fact that the story is legitimately poorly written. In the online writing community, most people genuinely hate the "strong female character" trope. We're tired of the fact she's always "small and quick" and can easily take down a man twice her size. We're tired of the fact she could have a garbage personality and is lauded for how wonderful and kind she is. Her growth arcs are "believing in herself" rather than any actual growth and character development. We don't like it, but Disney acts like we're clamoring for those types of characters.

The people who are tired of the race-swapping really just want characters who look the way they were originally intended or know that the best person was cast. A lot of white people acknowledge that having a white actor do yellow face or black face is wrong. They acknowledge it's bad and shouldn't happen. But they don't get the same courtesy. The push is diversity but they're literally recasting red-headed characters in favor of black people. It wasn't just Ariel. It's definitely a double-standard.

I will say that Snow White's success or lack of success really falls back to Rachel Zegler and the overall production. Mirror Mirror had a beautiful design, fun and "feminist" story, and actually cast little people for the dwarves. I wasn't a fan of Snow White and the Huntsman but the lead understood Snow White and the movie had a beautiful design. There was even a Snow White produced in 2001 with a mixed race Snow White WITH little people as the dwarves. The movie was beautiful. No one cared that she wasn't white. All three of those versions were successful because their Snow White actresses actually were respectful of the role.

Yeah, I can see that...and besides, I'm not really clued into Hollywood culture, so I'm probably not the best judge of this. ^^;
But at the same time, I don't think it's a coincidence that I had never heard of Rachel Zegler, or Halle Bailey, or Zendaya before they got cast in one of the big content megaplex roles (fortunately for Zendaya, people actually liked Marvel's Spider-Man series).

Like, they're not pulling this stuff with people like Keke Palmer; big household names that have massive recognition and public support...they're doing it with people where the average consumer will go "...wait, who?" because they won't have that support behind them. They're fresh meat, basically.

...Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if this was simply because they can't get more famous actresses of color with actual clout to willingly take these roles. But ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Sigh...yeah... I'm going to elaborate on that in a minute...

So the reason for this, I think, is because of what happens to an 'entity' that gets too big and too old for its own good. Similarly to what @ShidoDraws said.

At a certain point, the success of this entity becomes less about the people who work for it and earn that success for it, and more about the entity itself. All of a sudden, a job at Disney is the point of doing creative work, not the other way around. And if you can get that job without doing creative work of any kind of high caliber-- if someone can bribe or sweet-talk you into getting that job, or convince some authority that you 'deserve' it even if you're not really ready for it-- more power to you. Because it's no longer seen as a job; instead it's a goal to reach, something to impress people with at social gatherings.

And before long, this 'entity' ends up with a really chaotic organizational structure, where people who have no idea what's going on are in charge of key processes, and people who do have an idea of what's going on have to fight tooth and nail to do things correctly; wasting time and money and effort trying to wade through the chaos and make their voices heard. And a lot of the time they're drowned out.

I'm sure the execs who make (final...) creative decisions at Disney now DO think they're doing high-quality stuff. They think they're giving fans what they want and making the most profitable decisions; they just don't have the skill or insight to realize they aren't. And there's no one above them to tell them so.

Furthermore, they themselves have the power to override the decisions of everyone who knows better and does try to tell them so. If an award-winning writer or other creative professional makes a decision that they don't like or don't understand, they can just decide it's bad and order it to be changed. And they can just...keep doing this. Even if it makes production hell, even if it morphs what could have been a decent film into nonsensical key-jingling that doesn't have a point anymore. As long as they and all their yes-men don't see a problem, that's what we end up with. After all, they work at Disney, so they must know what they're doing...

This kind of environment quickly drives away creative pros with any amount of self-respect; at least those who attach it closely to their work. Artists who don't want rich morons messing up their masterpieces don't want to work for Disney, and those who don't care just make the slop and collect the checks so they can get back to the work they actually have a say in. ^^;
There's no more high-level mentorship going on during production: people who are ignorant but could learn get fewer opportunities; people with revolutionary ideas like "hey...what if we DIDN'T make slop" don't have any authorities around to back them up...it's a vicious cycle that continues to degrade the 'talent pool' until we get...what we have.

And yeah, I don't think things will change until it slowly lurches toward bankruptcy again...and considering how much worse corporate culture has gotten since the last time, I don't know if it will survive. It may just collapse, get sold for parts to its competitors, sell itself for parts to its competitors (lookin' at you, WB...) or just devolve into an AI-slop farm and fade into irrelevance.

I'm not sure about Halle Bailey, but Zendaya was in a Disney show so they were familiar with her. Connections and how well you work with others will get you far and she's also very charismatic. Halle was likely cast largely because of her singing, considering live action remakes had been criticized for that before, but I think she was also in a Disney show. Not sure because I don't watch those.

In a way, I can see why they would go for young actresses with an established fanbase that clearly likes Disney content. Also, it's cheaper to hire unknowns. Even Marvel movies did this back in the day with actors who are currently huge stars, like Robert Downey Jr. He was a recovering addict who couldn't get work and did the first Iron Man for like 500k. Chris Hemsworth, Chris Pratt, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, and a bunch of other big names were relative unknowns when they joined. Same with Star Wars, Diego Luna was mostly known for his work in Mexican shows and movies before Rogue One and now he has his own show.

Also, in regards to the backlash actors get, it depends on how the actors respond. Zendaya and Halle both got hate, but it wasn't as persistent as what Rachel got with Snow White and I think part of the reason is how they responded. Zendaya, from what I remember, stayed out of it and it mostly went away (though I think this is in part because comic movies can be looked at as an alternate universe anyway). Halle just kept talking about how happy she was with the role and I remember some very cute videos of her interacting with very young fans. Also, it was particularly ridiculous to argue about the skin tone of a mythical being. Like, there's no hiding why anyone would care in that case.

Rachel has been very outspoken, particularly about politics. She's also come off as dismissive to the concerns of hardcore Disney fans and the source material, which I personally don't care about because she's not wrong about the material needing to be updated, just not in the way Disney went about it. It reminds me of Captain Marvel and the Brie Larson drama. That just felt like it dragged on because of the way she responded and while it sucks that they have to play nice, it's just how the business works. If you alienate your audience and create trouble you're less likely to get more work, as we're seeing with Rachel.

I voted no because I feel like Disney is sort of stuck with "damned if you do and damned if you don't".

No matter what they do, people will be upset. I guess they decided to just focus on what makes them money. If the remakes make them money, then they will continue to do that. If a franchise flops, they scrap it and move onto something else.

I also think people online are just awful. There are content creators who make their whole thing just whining about Disney. It's sort of sad to be honest. I think the new Snow White looks bad, but I don't make that my whole online identity. I also don't see an issue with casting a latina to play Snow White. The movie isn't based off the fairytale, it based off the Disney movie. The same Disney movie where they had American accents. It was never true or realistic at all. It's also for little kids, I don't think little kids care about that stuff, they just want to be entertained.

Also with the whole leaked photos from Snow White. It sort of made the outrage sort of dumb when people seriously thought those were the dwarves. I pretty sure the people who worked on the film could not talk about it but they probably just saw these people being outraged as a bunch of idiots. These people don't care about if what they are mad at is even real or true, they just want a reason to be upset.