Disney has recently been flopping. They're trying to make bigger and bigger projects, including the marketing on these projects but none of them are really working that well. Wish, for example, was supposed to be the big 100th anniversary movie- and it completely flopped and everyone hated it, for all sorts of reasons. For the record, I did watch the movie and enjoyed it. However, I definitely did have some problems with it.
But one dud of a movie isn't why Disney is flopping. Disney has been doing kind of badly for a while. Obviously it's not going out of business anytime soon, but people are just really disenchanted with what Disney has been putting out recently, and I think I figured out why. But more importantly, how can we as writers and storytellers avoid going down the same dark path? How can we create really good stories that people read and go "oh, this is so much better than Disney!"
I'm a fantasy romance author. I grew up on the original Disney princess movies, so I consider that high praise. However, the bar seems to be pretty low at the moment, and part of that is due to the live-action remakes.
The Live-Action Remakes
Disney doesn't realize the appeal of the original animated versions of these stories. While they claim to be remaking these new movies to appeal to the next generation of kids. in reality it's all about money and profiting off nostalgia. Kids can (and do!) go back and watch the old animated movies, and it can actually be a way for them to connect with their parents or older siblings. They're still GOOD MOVIES. But rewatching the classics doesn't make Disney money, and so come the rereleases- the diamond edition, the from the vault edition, the live-action version, the endless sequels.
Are there some problematic elements in the original movies? Of course. Pocahontas could not be remade today, Peter Pan and Dumbo would have to undergo some changes for sure. A lot of the old Disney cartoons are legitimately shocking with the amount of blatant racism in them.
But long story short, in making these action remakes, Disney is trying to appeal to everybody, and in doing so, appealing to nobody.
Non-Traditional Casting
If you are up in arms about a black Ariel, just know my fists are up and I am ready to fight because she did an AMAZING job. Don't get me wrong, I LOVED the original Little Mermaid movie. You know how every little kid has that one movie that they watch over and over again and know every single word to and all their siblings are sick of watching it? That was The Little Mermaid for me. But this new movie was incredible for all sorts of reasons I don't have time to dive into.
Casting Halle Bailey as Ariel was something that made a lot of people pissy. While there are definitely a lot of people coming from a place of prejudice and hate, others are disappointed because they would have liked to see an actress that looks like the character in the movie they grew up on. While there's nothing wrong with wanting a white, red-headed mermaid for old times sake, it genuinely is really really cool that there is now ALSO a black Ariel. The existence of a new live-action movie doesn't erase the existence of the animated one. I hate to agree with Disney, but by moving beyond the stereotypical white girl princess, they can now connect to a wider group of people. Little girls will be able to watch the new Ariel movie and go "oh my god, she looks like me!" and that is a wonderful thing. The ethnicity of the little mermaid doesn't affect the story at all. It's not like they're remaking Mulan and suddenly she's, say, Nigerian, because that would make zero sense in the context of the story.
The existence of a new live action movie doesn't erase the existence of the animated one
The problem with non-traditional casting is that Disney says that they're doing it to be inclusive. Inclusivity is a great thing, and it's awesome. However, that's not really why they're doing it. They're simply trying to attract a wider variety of people by marketing things a certain way. I mean, in the past, all the Disney princesses were just white and European. That was it. Then they had like a little bit here and there with Jasmine (1992) and Pocahontas (1995) and Mulan (1998) and Tiana (2009), and that was great! Nobody was like "oh my god, they're making a black Disney princess, oh my god they're making a Chinese Disney princess" because nobody flipping cared. They were like, this story is awesome. She's cool. She has an awesome horse. She saved all of China. She's awesome.
Disney loves to condemn their past sins as if they aren't committing worse ones now.
Also in a lot of original Disney stories, it was the princesses that saved themselves or the love interests, so don't act like that's a new thing. Belle broke the enchanted curse, Pocahontas saved John Smith, Mulan took down Shan Yu and the entire Hun army. Disney loves to condemn their past sins as if they aren't committing worse ones now. Like, you're trying to get so far away from that that you have circled back around again in a different way. It's still not good.
TLDR; Disney's trying to appeal to a lot of people, but because they are not doing it with pure intentions of the heart, they are pissing everybody off
Fan Service
Fan service exists because fickle loud people are more focused on satisfying their immediate desires instead of the long-term benefits of a good story. This applies to both fans and to those in the movie-making business. As soon as the money becomes the priority over the art, the story is doomed. This is the true tale as old as time.
Take the Mandalorian for example. It started out as a passion project, some low-risk little rinky-dink show that might make some money on the side. However, after season one came out and everybody got a load of Baby Yoda? That got the producer's attention.
Boom, the budget for season two explodes, Dave Filoni has tons of creative control, he's free to spend the money on whatever he likes. He's like a kid in a candy shop. But then yoink, Disney giveth and Disney taketh away. Baby Yoda is making them too much money to give him away to Luke at the end of season two. Dave, you've gotta get that baby back.
Cue the Book of Boba Fett. Disney decides to pour a ton of money into it, they get their favorite little money-making buddy Dave on the job, and say DON'T SCREW THIS UP, COWBOY HAT. Dave says FINE I'LL BRING BABY YODA BACK and pours his heart and soul into those two random episodes that are basically Mandalorian season 2.5 in order to come up with a logical reason for him to return in season 3, and let's Disney do whatever the heck they want with Boba Fett. He picks his battles. The Book of Boba Fett gets 66% on Rotten Tomatoes and a (frankly) deserved audience score of 49%.
The Disney gods received Dave's sacrifice but hunger for more. They demand a season three. It's a standoff- Dave's artistic vision, already sullied by the higher-ups interference, versus the bosses with the money. Dave, knowing he is fighting a losing battle, does what he can and brings back Bo-Katan and the Mandalorians. The Mandalorians take back their homeworld and Mando and Grogu get to retire, living out their days in peace as father and son. But with Disney executives breathing down his back, Dave's execution of season three fumbles, and the season receives 84% on Rotten Tomatoes- the lowest out of all three seasons- and a whopping 50% audience score.
There are many more examples of this, but that's all for now. Moral of the story? Once the focus is on making money instead of making art, everything suffers. Let me know if you want a part two!
Sincerely,
the chairman of Yappaholics Anonymous,
Julia