Disney could sell Lucasfilm ?

[HeartBlade]

Banned Disney movies:

1. Beauty and The Beast​

View attachment 1717080

Back in 2017, Disney celebrated its "first gay character," Lefou, in the live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast. The only confirmation he was gay was one second of him dancing with a man in a crowd scene, but still, it was enough to get the film banned in Kuwait.

Next up was the Pixar film Onward, which features a cyclops cop voiced by Lena Waithe who has one line when she mentions her girlfriend and says the popular gay catchphrase "it gets better." The scene was cut in Russia, and the movie was banned in Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.

Marvel's first gay superhero also got his movie banned. In 2021, Marvel released The Eternals, which featured Phastos, a gay, married man, and his husband. The film was banned in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar after Disney refused to edit out the scene involving Phastos and his husband.

Steven Speilberg's adaptation of West Side Story was the next Disney film to get banned. In it, Speilberg updated the character Anybodys to be trans, played by nonbinary actor Iris Menas. Because of that, the film was banned in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.

Despite America Chavez's lesbianism being completely absent in the latest Doctor Strange movie, the film was still banned in Saudi Arabia and possibly Kuwait due to a small scene where she talks about having two lesbian moms.

Lightyear is the latest Disney film to be banned overseas for LGBTQ+ content. It's been banned in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for its inclusion of a same-sex kiss between two women.

I was talking about the article's points, not yours.

But if we want to delve into this, its hard to say exactly how much overseas revenue comes from the Middle East and these countries in particular where the movies seem to be banned most. Disney obviously felt that expressing this ideology triumphs the profits made from these countries and felt the ban and resulting loss in revenue was acceptable.

I do think the existence of D+ and knowing that you just need to wait a couple months for the latest movies to come to the platform is a far larger cost since D+ is worldwide. If you have two or three children or are hosting a party or something and the kids want to see a movie, instead of shilling out a nice chunk of money for tickets for the kids you can just turn the tv on.

 

[janglesworthy]

I can't find the article, but there was one talking about the down side of D+ and how Disney may loose more money not being able to sell their shows to places like netflix vs hosting it their own content and the cost of that.

 

[blewis17]

I do think the existence of D+ and knowing that you just need to wait a couple months for the latest movies to come to the platform is a far larger cost since D+ is worldwide. If you have two or three children or are hosting a party or something and the kids want to see a movie, instead of shilling out a nice chunk of money for tickets for the kids you can just turn the tv on.

This.

 

[HeartBlade]

I can't find the article, but there was one talking about the down side of D+ and how Disney may loose more money not being able to sell their shows to places like netflix vs hosting it their own content and the cost of that.

Thats definitely a good point too although I dont think Disney faces this issue. First, Disney could still sell their shows onto other platforms like Netflix but doing so makes their own platform far less appealing.

Given that D+ is the third largest platform by number of subscribers (which directly equates to paying customers) according to the below link, I dont think this is a huge issue tbh.

Top Streaming Services by Subscribers • FlixPatrol.

D+ focusing on making good content at a low budget that people would want to stay subscribed to D+ even if they dont have access to the latest movies would be the trick for D+ to solve. Having exclusives like Andor, Mando, Marvel series should be a good enough selling point (although there is alot of criticism directed toward alot of their exclusive shows) so they obviously have the stuff to draw interest. They do need to be able to produce these shows on a much lower budget while maintaining customer interest. That should hopefully be enough to keep customers subscribed to D+ without movies which they can then release to D+ as some added benefit 3 years after release so it doesnt cannibalize their ticket sales.

Although, in some regards, making bad shows might be a good strategy lol. There was far more discussion about Velma and enough hate-watching to encourage a second season while amazing tv shows like Cobra Kai or Reacher dont seem to get even half the buzz. In this current internet focused on raging on stuff, the critical flops like Rings of Power may be doing better numberwise than the good shows (although Rings apparently had a huge drop off so not sure).

 

[dascoyne]

Right you are...I had just watched "Ball of Fire" with Cooper and Stanwyck Too fast on the "enter" button

It's too bad Stanwyck seems only remembered for Big Valley nowadays, if at all. She was in countless Hollywood classics that don't seem to be as well known today. Meet John Doe, Ball of Fire, Stella Dallas, Sorry Wrong Number, etc. (Maybe Double Indemnity hasn't been entirely forgotten.)

 

[Prop Collector]

Disney World Hasn’t Felt This Empty in Years

 

[Solo4114]

I can't find the article, but there was one talking about the down side of D+ and how Disney may loose more money not being able to sell their shows to places like netflix vs hosting it their own content and the cost of that.

This is actually partially what's behind The-Artist-Formerly-Known-As-HBO pulling shows like Westworld from their platform, and (planning on) selling them to other platforms like Tubi, which are ad-supported.

It's a way to continue a revenue stream from a product, but not have to pay maintenance costs (in a manner of speaking). The main question becomes whether you can find a balance point between the revenue still being worth what you'd get from maintaining it vs. the actual maintenance costs of keeping it on your platform.

 

[janglesworthy]

Interesting, so I'm guessing Par+ will have the same issue then.

 

[Ron]

There's been a lot of "Disney Fires Kathleen Kennedy!" type click bait videos out there. Normally I wouldn't even bother however, this one looks legit ...

 

[Usagi Pilgrim]

There's been a lot of "Disney Fires Kathleen Kennedy!" type click bait videos out there. Normally I wouldn't even bother however, this one looks legit...

Yeah... SW Theory is a pretty straight channel without click bait-y content. I did just see a Google headline saying that "KK FIRED" is trending on Twitter, but I personally have no idea.

 

[Ron]

Let's just pretend Iger and the Disney execs did want her gone. Her contract ends next year so they would probably just wait it out. Again, IF they actually wanted her out which I haven't read or heard any legitimate info on that.

 

[janglesworthy]

You gotta hit that don't recommend channel button and enjoy youtube click bait free

 

[batguy]

Let's just pretend Iger and the Disney execs did want her gone. Her contract ends next year so they would probably just wait it out. Again, IF they actually wanted her out which I haven't read or heard any legitimate info on that.

I see two ways to look at that.

One the one hand, maybe Iger wants KK gone but he doesn't want the ruckus. So he lets her contract run out quietly next year and doesn't renew it.

Another idea would be that Iger needs somebody to blame. So he might choose to make a show of firing somebody that he was already planning on replacing next year when her contract was up.


Either way, I do think KK is done at Disney. Heads need to roll over all the money being lost. If hers isn't one of them . . well, that's just plain irrational at this point. If Disney's bigwigs want a woman in charge of LFL then they could hire a different one. KK has wrecked every LFL franchise that she has messed with.

 

[HeartBlade]

I dont see her being fired. Firing someone at her position is going to be expensive and Disney is not in a position of making expensive displays, especially if the message is not going to be taken well by everyone.

Lets be real, firing KK is going to result in alot of criticism directed against Disney for firing a “woman in power” and “giving in to toxic fans.” Letting her contract just end makes more sense.

 

[batguy]

I dont see her being fired. Firing someone at her position is going to be expensive and Disney is not in a position of making expensive displays, especially if the message is not going to be taken well by everyone.

Lets be real, firing KK is going to result in alot of criticism directed against Disney for firing a “woman in power” and “giving in to toxic fans.” Letting her contract just end makes more sense.

Disney can dictate how the MSM covers Kennedy's firing with a few phone calls. Just like they dictated when the MSM was allowed to criticize KK. I don't see that issue being a big obstacle for Disney.

Maybe Disney cares about the Blackrock social credit score image but that's fixable too. Just replace her with another woman.

 

[Sluis Van Shipyards]

I don't think firing KK would solve anything unless the person who was put in charge cleaned house or cracked down on the nonsense. Seriously though how much of the company can KK tank before the board gets rid of her?! I've already heard movie critics, who usually have their lips attached to movie company butts, say that Lucasfilm has used up most of its goodwill/reputation with fans.

 

[batguy]

The more important issue is whether Disney's top brass is willing to do what it takes to put the corp back into creative health.

I'm as doubtful as anybody else. It would take years of discipline & delayed financial gratification to repair the damage.

They spent more than a decade digging this deep hole. There is no quick fix. And the fix won't come from the same mindsets/priorities that got them into it.

 

[HeartBlade]

The more important issue is whether Disney's top brass is willing to do what it takes to put the corp back into creative health.

I'm as doubtful as anybody else. It would take years of discipline & delayed financial gratification to repair the damage.

They spent more than a decade digging this deep hole. There is no quick fix. And the fix won't come from the same mindsets/priorities that got them into it.

I think the initial question is is there anyone who is capable of turning the ship around in Lucasfilm or Disney at large in the first place?

The only one I can think of is possibly Feige. Yes the MCU is circling the drain now but this has been an incredible franchise for 11 years (Ironman to Endgame) and I do think there is burnout both from audiences and the talent in the MCU themselves.

I dont see Filloni turning the ship or anyone else that has worked on a star wars property so far.

 

[Cephus]

I think the initial question is is there anyone who is capable of turning the ship around in Lucasfilm or Disney at large in the first place?

The only one I can think of is possibly Feige. Yes the MCU is circling the drain now but this has been an incredible franchise for 11 years (Ironman to Endgame) and I do think there is burnout both from audiences and the talent in the MCU themselves.

I dont see Filloni turning the ship or anyone else that has worked on a star wars property so far.

Feige is the one that drove Phase 4 into the ground and phase 5 isn't going so hot.

 

[batguy]

I think it would take an unprecedented willingness to focus on creative quality and delay their fiancial gratification for many years.

And I'm not convinced that Disney or any of the big studios would ever be willing to do that.

The Marvel golden age of the 2000s-2010s happened in spite of the studio system's habits because the storylines were pre-existing. The Lucas-era Star Wars movie series was possible because they were independently done.

I can't think of any example of a major movie series that showed that kind of long-term discipline. The standard habit is for a studio to start butting in at about the 3rd movie. They get two hits in a row and they start thinking it's a slam dunk. Now the want the director to cram in 12 extra villians and some Ewoks and a spinoff good guy . . . and then the 3rd movie craps the bed. But it makes money so the studio doesn't see the problem. They just blame the 4th movie (which is probably a reboot) when it loses money on behalf of the 3rd one.