That's how they've been handling the theme parks. They're pissing off even the obsessive theme park regulars by driving up prices for worse and less experiences. Look at that embarrassment of a Star Wars LARP hotel. They know the audience they want and it's rich dedicated shills who'll happily drop thousands of dollars because it's DISNEY and EXPENSIVE.
I kinda want to say take out the Atlantis sequel and Stitch the Movie, since they're both basically starting episodes for TV shows. In the former's case the Atlantis series was canned before it ever aired, while the latter had a very successful run with a very mis-matched name (it had to do with trying to appeal more to the Asian market and then changing their mind). At any rate there's a very different feel to these two compared to everything else up there, minus Return of Jafar which was the same thing, but it's also patient zero for this so I feel less sympathy (and I say this as someone who watched the Aladdin TV show back in the 90's).Modern Disney is what happens when a company that's too big to fail is taken to its logical, narcoleptic conclusion. When all you have to do to print payola is to take one of your animated classics (or not-so-classics), spray some ugly live action CGI paint over it, and throw in a few woke good boy points for good measure, guess what TF they're gonna make for-fucking-ever? I asked myself the same question not too long ago: "When did Disney go from 'when you wish upon a star' to 'when an executive wants a brand-new car'?" And then it hit me: it was always this way. Case in point:
View attachment 2940353
Notice how, between the early 90s and mid-2000s, there was a onslaught of DTV sequels to said animated classics? It's for the same reason that the live-action remakes exist:
View attachment 2940372
They made a loooooot of moolah for old Michael Rat. The fault lies with the general public here, as well. Instead of rejecting this slop, they gladly gave the Rat their cash, because, fuck, something's gotta shut little Timmy/Tara up for a couple of hours. It's sad, really.
Pretty sure there was. I think it had to do with how they were cheapening the brand and it wasn't a good look. I wonder if the same thing is going on now with the "live action" remakes.
Dumb little kids and the parents who just want them quiet for a couple hours, yeah. Way back in the 90's my childhood best friend was way into the Land Before Time sequels when they first started, way more than the original (superior) movie. So I had to watch them a lot with her to make her happy even though I didn't like them. So it wasn't completely universal, but a lot of kids didn't care if they weren't exposed to higher quality movies. I believe these make up a large bulk of adults who will defend them today as "not that bad". Or were overly sensitive and scared too easily.
Jesus Christ, I feel bad for those kids.
It'd be super interesting to do a study on adults who have constant "anxiety attacks" and ask what childhood films they grew up with, and what they weren't allowed to watch. Given a lot of them are into kiddie shows and into the creepy fetish shit that plagues DeviantArt, there could be a correlation of not being allowed to watch "scary movies" on top of how a lot of kids' movies these days that just feel too safe and yet have an unsettling adult following.
I think a lot of kids gravitate to dark stuff. They have really dark senses of humor - I did when I was a kid.
> Meet The Robinsons (2007) had a whole scene of the world destroyed and humans enslaved by machines, I would consider that dark.
Epic Mickey is fucking amazing and I love its themes, but it's a video game. It's kinda niche even for Disney fans.
It was Gothic and all, but I dunno, it still felt like it played things a bit too safe to keep that PG rating. All that eye-gouging was gross, but weirdly bloodless.
The 2010s started out with a very experimental Disney, but like halfway through they got super corporate. I think the million acquisitions really changed them as they felt they could comfortably rely on Marvel and Star Wars.
This is exactly why I loved the original, and exactly why I hated the sequels. The "scary" bits never actually felt scary, even when I was five and the second one just came out. The original Sharptooth had an actual kill count, and made actual efforts to eat the protagonists. Who in turn made a dangerous plan to kill Sharptooth by dropping a boulder on him and drowning him. The sequels, from what little I remember, generally had goofy primary antagonists that sang silly songs and may or may not make attempts to even eat the main characters, and then maybe a sharptooth would make a cameo appearance near the end to make a half-assed attempt to eat someone before running away. Yawn, and yet my best friend loved them. I don't know if her parents just didn't challenge her at the right age or if she didn't like to be challenged, or what.
iirc isn't there something about Snow White having been a big influence on the expressionist style of Italian horror because it was the only thing for a while around WWII?
It sucked ass. If Burton had made it twenty years earlier, it would have been good...
Dario Argento said it was a big inspiration for Suspiria.
Speaking of Disney+ and their 70s and 80s movies.....why the hell isn't The Watcher in the Woods on there?! Or Something Wicked This Way Comes?! Both legitimately good "family" horror films (ahhhh, remember when that genre was a thing?). Such a shame, they need more love.
That was a terrible movie. They got rid of all the songs and 90% of the second half of the stage musical that made it funny.
Disney doesn't like to acknowledge those. At least they have Return to Oz.