Jump to content

Welcome to HPFT

We are a multi-fandom/original fiction community with roots in the Harry Potter fandom community. We strive to maintain a strong focus on author feedback and inclusive writing. Here on the forums, you can join a house and participate in House Cup events, participate in writing challenges, play games, and much more!

Join the Forums

Check out the Archives

HPFT has a moderated multi-fandom/original fiction archive with an unlimited queue. There you can post your writing, as well as read and review other members' writing. Be sure to stop by and check out our latest featured stories!

Join the Archives

Find us on Social Media

HPFT is active on social media. You can find us and many members busily tweeting on Twitter, join us for livestreams on YouTube, check out aesthetics on Instagram, get sneak peeks on Snapchat, and interact on Tumblr! All our social media links can be found below.

News Ticker
  • Happy Pride month! <3
  • Congratulations to all of our house award winners!
  • The House Cup Finale is underway! Check out the Campaign Headquarters sub-forum for more information.

inaudible sigh

Sign in to follow this  
  • entries
    3
  • comments
    18
  • views
    416

disney has really lost its way

just.a.willow.tree

130 views

Since pretty much birth, I have loved Disney movies. I spent my childhood watching the old animated classics, falling in love with the songs, and automatically befriending anyone who also adored the iconic princesses. (I still do! Mulan is my favorite princess, if you would like to bond over the greatness of the original movie.) I have a certain sentimentality regarding Disney movies, and so in recent years, it's been a little difficult coming to terms with the ceaseless, ever-growing mountain of evidence that Disney, holding a near-monopoly on the film industry, is willing to sacrifice artistic integrity for easy money. In short, I'm talking about the live-action remakes.

So in this post, I want to talk about how the company behind these films are putting very limited creative energy into the film, and how they're taking advantage of audiences' loves for older films to make easy billions (and taking advantage of audiences in other ways). This has been plaguing me since I was a child (or whenever they started doing these things, haha), and then I realized I could make a blog post about it and hopefully cleanse myself of any future opinions regarding the live-action remakes at all! 😂 Fingers crossed.

💖 C R E A T I V I T Y 💖

Speaking purely from an artistic standpoint, it is incredibly disheartening seeing America's largest film company just...stop trying. They're not introducing many new stories to film anymore, not taking enough risks with their story-telling. In fact, the past few years have been so saturated with recycled/self-plagiarized ideas that it took me a hot second to remember any original film Disney has made, with "original" meaning "not copying one of their old films". (I had to Google it. It was A Wrinkle in Time.)

Imagine this: for every remake that Disney spends millions on, how many new story proposals are they discarding? In their project selection process, they are actively choosing these remakes over someone's creative ideas, which would explain why we've seen a considerable drop in original output. What if we could've seen adaptations of folktales from all across the world, or perhaps more adaptations of beloved children's books (as in with A Wrinkle in Time), or -- though this is quite a reach -- genuinely new, purely Disney creations?

Obviously some live-action remakes are less creative than others. The original, which I'd claim is Maleficent (feel free to disagree), was very much not suspect because it subverted the original story in a very drastic way. It was still evidently a remake in a way, since Maleficent is a creation of Disney's, but it was different enough to be inoffensive. I don't think anyone really suspected that Maleficent would be the beginning of a long, long chain of unoriginality. Cinderella was the next one, and it was still okay -- they followed the original storyline quite closely, but, I mean, it got a pass for not being a straight-up copy, and being just the second one. In hindsight, I am more disappointed in the existence of these two movies, but at the time, I was, in all my fourteen-year-old blindness, like, "OH! Nice."

At some point, I found out about the millions of other adaptations that were to follow. The Jungle BookBeauty and the BeastAladdinDumboThe Lion King, Mulan, The Little Mermaid... (These are all from memory, so I'm sure I missed some, or listed them out of order.) And that's when my young self first started feeling mildly disturbed by the path that my favorite film company was choosing to take. Of the movies I've listed, I think the worst ones on the creativity scale are Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King (which has not come out yet, but I'm going based on their marketing). They were advertised as shot-for-shot remakes of the originals, copying as many of the original scenes and songs as they could manage, and (for Beauty and the Beast) with superfluous backstory added to satisfy the supposed needs of picky plot-hole finders.

I mean, it paid off, I suppose. Beauty and the Beast grossed a startling $1.2 billion, all for taking an old story and slapping it into a new dimension.

For me, it's baffling seeing discourse on Twitter surrounding the live-action movies, for two main reasons: (1) these discussions seem to miss the bigger-picture problems of supporting an all-powerful film company in making these minimally-creative movies (like when people say they won't support The Lion King because it's silly to create a live-action film with pure CGI animation), and (2) some of the disagreements seem to actively promote shot-for-shot remakes (like the outrage that surfaced when Disney revealed that neither Mushu nor Li Shang would be in the live-action version of Mulan).

Personally, I think the upcoming Mulan has the most promise of any of the live-action adaptations, because you don't already know each and every character. 😅

💔 A U D I E N C E   M A N I P U L A T I O N 💔

I think this is a good place to stop for a moment and recommend this YouTube video, Woke Brands+ (M) by hbomberguy. It's very entertaining and interesting, though if you don't want to watch it, I'd understand (as it is an approximately twenty-five minute video haha). The guy in the video explains this better than I do, but the point that he makes that I'd like to emphasize is: these days, when corporations advertise their products as "progressive" and "forward-thinking," the bigger the conservative backlash on social media, the better it is for them. Because then you have a large wave of liberal supporters of the progressive ads defending it, and mocking the backlash/boycotts... And everyone who talks about the product, be it positively or negatively, contributes to the grand marketing scheme of that particular company, simply due to the massive exposure the product/company is getting.

So how does this relate to Disney?

Well, you might recall the perceived outrage over Ariel's casting, and Twitter's collective defense of Halle Bailey in that role. The debate was trending on Twitter, and it seemed like almost everyone was talking about it. And I think that it's great that so many people love the idea of a black Ariel, and support the diverse casting, but the thing is, most people seemed to miss the fact that this was almost certainly Disney's goal. They wanted the casting to be controversial so that their film would garner extra attention. Imagine how much free advertising Disney has received for The Little Mermaid from the past week alone, all from unsuspecting supporters who thought they were defending Disney against racist people, when really the racism was what Disney almost certainly hoped for in the first place.

(Also, the majority of the racist tweets people were responding to were actually bots. Like, if you actually search up the Twitter handles of the quoted/screenshotted tweets that people are responding to, you'll find nonsensical, random, very bot-like tweets. Even if Disney didn't actively create/promote the bots, I'm sure they're more than grateful for the existence of the bots now, after the crazy amount of attention The Little Mermaid got.)

This paragraph is very speculative, but I feel like these series of live-action remakes are only really successful because of Disney playing upon their audiences' nostalgia for their older movies, and providing a more up to date, modern version of these old favorites. It seems like Disney's trying to sever ties with two-dimensional animation and prove they're up to par with modern animation technologies, by following their successful formula of "nostalgia + remakes = $$$ + modern legacy".

🧜‍♀️ I N   S U M 🧜‍♀️

I think it's important to acknowledge that these more depressing aspects of Disney exist, especially if you really, really love their movies as I do. I really miss their attempts to connect different fairytales and folktales to children and families, and this new trend seems to highlight the worst parts of them as a company, haha. But also! If you think that I've been wrong about anything, or too harsh, definitely feel free to disagree with me! ❤️ Or if you agree, also leave your thoughts!

Also, if you read through all of this, thank you omg. I love you guys!

  • Like 5
  • Ravenclaw 1


6 Comments


Recommended Comments

toomanycurls

Posted

I can't remember what book this was from but I feel as if a hallmark of living in a dystopian future is that we don't tell new stories and only recycle the same stories with new actors. Rehashing the older and successful movies/plots discourage people from thinking critically. 

I'm right with you with my love of so much content Disney puts out but also disappointment in just as much, if not more, of their practices. There's definitely something behind the idea that anything that triggers conservative outrage flushes in the liberal support (mostly the $$$$$). 

  • Like 3

Share this comment


Link to comment
sibilant

Posted (edited)

Ahhhhh, capitalism. 

I’m right with you! Fairy tales are my absolute favorite things, and I really miss when Disney used to create original stories; now I feel like they’re feeding off of people’s nostalgia. And even though they’re introducing more diversity—which I love!—the way that they’re doing it makes me feel icky too, like they’re monetizing (marginalized) people’s identities rather than truly representing their stories. 

I really love the idea of Disney using their platform to Disney-fy stories from other cultures (though concerns about cultural appropriation always ring in the back of my head when I think about that). I loved Bao and Moana, and I’m really really hoping to see more content like that! I think one of the best things to come out of the backlash against Halle Bailey’s casting was all the art and hypotheses about representations of princesses in other cultures, and I’m really hoping artists and writers and animators will run with those ideas.

And I’m extra excited for the Mulan remake, knowing that it’s going to pay heed to the original legend of Mulan rather than the film. If it goes well, I’m hoping it’ll spark a trend of more films that take legends and myths from around the world and bring their magic to the big screen (which is what Disney has been doing for so long).

Also, don’t want to get too political but re: monopolizing on conservative outrage to flush in liberal support—I think that’s been a political weapon for far too long and is one of the reasons that our society is so deeply divided, and another example of how deeply implicated tech companies are in perpetuating that divide. BUT ANYWAYS. This is neither the time nor place for that rant :P 

Thanks for sharing this blog post, Eva! A lot of these things have been on my mind recently and you expressed them so eloquently.

Edited by sibilant
  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment
victoria_anne

Posted (edited)

This is why we must all watch Dreamworks films 😏

Also a Wrinkle In Time doesn’t really count as original because it was based on a book! 😊

Edited by victoria_anne
  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment
sunshine_locks

Posted

Oh, oof, I once theorized in a throwaway tweet that maybe Disney's goal of casting Halle Bailey was to induce controversy but I was a bit off with my reasoning though, saying that maybe it was to cover up all the changes they're making to Mulan. I've since learned a bit more around the matter, and am interested to see the route Disney takes with Mulan, but it's unlikely that I'll watch the movie in the theaters though because Disney movies have never been a part of my childhood. (Well, unlike the TV shows, at least.)

I agree with you though. There is a startling lack of creativity in the movies that Disney is making, and I think that movies that take maybe one or two elements from the stories would capture my interest more than the ones sticking to the straight and narrow. I think that's another one of the reasons I never went to watch the movie adaptations of these stories, as I'd personally love to see stories like Bao and Moana

  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment
Rainbow-tui

Posted

Moana was fairly well received along the lines of something more relatable to NZ and the wider Pacific region, although I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks it bizarre she features in Disney on ice. Otherwise, creating live action remakes generally makes me bored and annoyed, because what was so wrong with the original? For far more original animated films I veer towards Studio Ghibli, because they are fantastic.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
just.a.willow.tree

Posted

@sibilant I honestly hope that if Disney decides to adapt folktales from other cultures in the future, they'll hire people from that culture to work on the movie! It might be wishful thinking, but that's what I hope will happen, otherwise it will definitely drift into cultural appropriation territory. It's for that reason that I'm not, like, stoked for Mulan, because the director is, if I recall correctly, very much not Chinese. 😂 I saw a few different interpretations of old fairytales where they changed the culture up, and I thought those were interesting! (The art was so pretty omg. 😍) I still hope more for original stories with new and diverse creators, though.

@victoria_anne Haha, I know, I had a debate with myself as to whether I should really call A Wrinkle in Time original. 😅 But like since ultimately, most of what Disney creates isn't actually super original, with their fairytale adaptations, I just decided to put A Wrinkle in Time along with the rest of the Disney adaptations. (At least, in relation to the remakes, it feels way fresher, haha.)

@Rainbow-tui Studio Ghibli is definitely so creative and imaginative! I love the films from that studio so much. ❤️

Share this comment


Link to comment
×
×
  • Create New...