Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 12:53:36 AM

Login with username, password and session length

The 'Fuck You, Disney' Thread

Started by St_Eddie, April 24, 2019, 08:07:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Replies From View

Quote from: sevendaughters on April 26, 2019, 06:40:27 PM
I haven't insisted on it once.

Not you, but there are people in the thread arguing simply that because smoking happens in real life, its positive qualities should be represented in films.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Replies From View on April 26, 2019, 06:45:08 PM
But a big part of this is about how the tobacco industries have worked with movie studios in the past not to promote specific brands but to communicate that smoking is a desirable activity in its own right.  I can't really think of any other industry that has done that.

"In the past" being the key phrase there.  We're long past the times of Fred Flintstone puffing on a cigarette and expressing its virtues to the kids at home.  It's illegal to do that these days and rightfully so.  If a character is smoking a cigarette in a film, then that's an artistic choice on the part of the filmmaker and/or actor.  It's not because the tobacco companies are working in cahoots with the filmmakers to promote smoking.

Quote from: Replies From View on April 26, 2019, 06:47:05 PM
Not you, but there are people in the thread arguing simply that because smoking happens in real life, its positive qualities should be represented in films.

I've not read a single comment within this thread where anyone has argued that smoking should be portrayed in a positive light, much less said so myself.

Replies From View

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 26, 2019, 06:51:16 PM
"In the past" being the key phrase there.  We're long past the times of Fred Flintstone puffing on a cigarette and expressing its virtues to the kids at home.  It's illegal to do that these days and rightfully so. 

To be honest you've seemed to be taking issue with the rules that restrict the amount of smoking that can happen nowadays in films.

Sin Agog

Is Disney largely to blame for why adult animation never particularly took off here the way it did in Japan or Russia?  I can't think of any reason why the fact that something's drawn should make it belong to any particular age group.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Replies From View on April 26, 2019, 06:57:16 PM
To be honest you've seemed to be taking issue with the rules that restrict the amount of smoking that can happen nowadays in films.

I think that rules are important when it comes to showing smoking onscreen.  As this thread has gone on, I've come to the conclusion that I don't think that it's appropriate to show characters smoking in kids films (although I question why it's then conversely deemed acceptable to show guns, murder and drinking in children's entertainment).  I also find the regulations that are in place which prevent the promotion of cigarette brands within film to be a good thing.  I've never argued against that.

What I have argued against and will continue to argue against is the idea that smoking cannot be used in an effective manner to inform the audience about the nature of a character and the concept that smoking should not be portrayed in film at all, or that smoking should only be shown when it's being portrayed in a negative light (that's not to say that I think that it should be portrayed in a positive light either - there's such a thing as a neutral portrayal).

madhair60

I Am sorry for my Behaviour in this and other Threads.

Sin Agog

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 26, 2019, 07:02:58 PM
I think that rules are important when it comes to showing smoking onscreen.  As this thread has gone on, I've come to the conclusion that I don't think that it's appropriate to show characters smoking in kids films (although I question why it's then conversely deemed acceptable to show guns, murder and drinking in children's entertainment).  I also find the regulations that are in place which prevent the promotion of cigarette brands within film to be a good thing.  I've never argued against that.

What I have argued against and will continue to argue against is the idea that smoking cannot be used in an effective manner to inform the audience about the nature of a character and the concept that smoking should not be portrayed in film at all, or that smoking should only be shown when it's being portrayed in a negative light (that's not to say that I think that it should be portrayed in a positive light either - there's such a thing as a neutral portrayal).

Man, every Eddie VS The Thread debate has the exact same arc.  First act begins with you diving in all full of beans and dogma about something or other.  The second act is the boring part where everyone snips the corners off each other's posts for days.  And in the finale a bloody, beaten Eddie with cut-up bare feet heroically, magnanimously concedes that maybe he didn't think it through in the beginning and perhaps you guyze have a point.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Sin Agog on April 26, 2019, 09:37:35 PM
Man, every Eddie VS The Thread debate has the exact same arc.  First act begins with you diving in all full of beans and dogma about something or other.  The second act is the boring part where everyone snips the corners off each other's posts for days.  And in the finale a bloody, beaten Eddie with cut-up bare feet heroically, magnanimously concedes that maybe he didn't think it through in the beginning and perhaps you guyze have a point.

No, not quite.  Don't get me wrong, you've got the broad-strokes down pat but I stand by the vast majority of what I said, with the caveat that I was wrong on some of the specifics and I gladly copped to that (the main one being in regards to the depiction of smoking in Disney branded films).  Just for once I'd care to see someone else do likewise and concede when I've made a valid point or two along the way.  Sadly, I think that a lot of folks have too much pride to admit when their opinion is not completely watertight and infallible.  I don't have that problem, as I have no pride... or self-respect for that matter.

Regardless, the whole cigarettes in film debate was a tangent.  I still stand firm and resolute in my overall stance on...

Fuck you, Disney.

Dex Sawash


Kelvin

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 26, 2019, 10:23:57 PM
No, not quite.  Don't get me wrong, you've got the broad-strokes down pat but I stand by the vast majority of what I said, with the caveat that I was wrong on some of the specifics and I gladly copped to that (the main one being in regards to depicting smoking in Disney branded films).  Just for once I'd care to see someone else do likewise and concede when I've made a valid point or two along the way.  Sadly, I think that a lot of folks have too much pride to admit when their opinion is not completely watertight and infallible.  I don't have that problem, as I have no pride... or self-respect for that matter.

Regardless, the whole cigarettes in film thing was a tangent.  I still stand firm and resolute in my overall stance on...

Fuck you, Disney.

As I said before, I basically agree with you about Disney being deeply sinister, and I also agree with you that cigarettes are a perfectly valid visual shorthand for things like stress, rebellion, nihlism, etc. I find the idea that they should be just avoided in films entirely - even films directed at adults - pretty ridiculous, inconsistent and patronising, tbh.

However, I also think you're daft for fighting this battle over a Disney version of West Side Story. As a massive family brand, I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to avoid smoking in their more accessible output. Of the thousands of examples to use, this was the wrong one. Although more generally, Fuck Disney.     

Noodle Lizard

Quote from: Replies From View on April 26, 2019, 12:42:48 PM
It's a bit like saying knife crime is part of the London scene so movies should help normalise it in the process of reflecting it.

Also, again, we are talking about films targeted at young impressionable people.  As well as restrictions on nicotine promotion there are also limits now on how fast food can be marketed to them, and probably other things.  I have no understanding at all of why this should cause such a stir to anyone who doesn't make money from it.

Read the comment I was responding to.

QuoteThere are almost no movies that need cigarettes in storylines. Except ofcourse films like Thank You For Smoking. Otherwise they dont add anything to stories, visuals and movies in general. A cigarette in movies ban is a good thing.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Kelvin on April 26, 2019, 10:41:37 PM
As I said before, I basically agree with you about Disney being deeply sinister, and I also agree with you that cigarettes are a perfectly valid visual shorthand for things like stress, rebellion, nihlism, etc. I find the idea that they should be just avoided in films entirely - even films directed at adults - pretty ridiculous, inconsistent and patronising, tbh.

I quite agree.

Quote from: Kelvin on April 26, 2019, 10:41:37 PMHowever, I also think you're daft for fighting this battle over a Disney version of West Side Story. As a massive family brand, I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to avoid smoking in their more accessible output. Of the thousands of examples to use, this was the wrong one. Although more generally, Fuck Disney.     

I feel that a lot of people are misunderstanding my stance here, which to be fair may be down to a failure to clearly communicate my stance in the first place.  This thread is a general thread about the increasingly insidious nature of Disney as a company and its relationship within the film industry, or rather its continuing consumption of the film industry.  I will be using this thread to post any and all news relating to that topic.

It just so happened that the two most recent and therefore relevant pieces of news relating to Disney when I created this thread were the continued bullying of theatres to give Disney produced movies an unfair advantage over other studios' output and indeed, the removal of cigarettes from Spielberg's upcoming West Side Story adaptation.  The cigarette removal from West Side Story news piece in particular is not something that I deeply care about (certainly not as much as Disney's bullying of theatres and their near monopoly status).  It just so happened to be in the news when I created this thread (a thread which I've been intending to create for some time now) and was therefore relevant to use as a news piece to kick the thread off with.

Therefore if you or others think that I've chosen this hill to die upon, in regards to the West Side Story news piece, then that's not the case at all.  I didn't expect that specific tangent to spiral into the multi-page spanning debate that it has.  However, I must confess that I was surprised to see so many people argue for not just the removal of smoking in kids films (something which I know agree with, following the debate) but also smoking in film in general.  That did provoke a certain amount of ire and disbelief within me and so, I attempted to counter that argument.  In terms of West Side Story specifically and where I now stand on that, I will refer you to my earlier comment...

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 26, 2019, 04:42:13 PM
That's a tricky one because, as I pointed out earlier within this thread that film started out as a project under development over at 20th Century Fox, prior to Disney's acquisition of the studio and furthermore, I wouldn't classify West Side Story as a kids film.  I think that Disney should release it under the Fox label and allow Spielberg make it the way that he wants to make it, cigarettes included if that's what he cares to include.

...That's how I feel.  However, given that Disney are apparently choosing to release the film under the Disney label, as opposed to the 20th Century Fox label (which Disney are still going to be making use of for more adult fare, now that they own it), I agree that there should not be any smoking within it.  I don't agree with Disney's decision to not release the film under the 20th Century Fox label, as opposed to the Disney one, given that West Side Story is not a kids film but that's a separate issue.

In summary, this thread is for the general discussion of all things 'Fuck you, Disney' and if it goes off on these little tangents as more news is added, as it has done for the cigarettes in film debate, then that's great but please don't think that every little bit of news that I post within this thread from here on out is something that I'm fiercely and passionately worked up about because, as in the case of the West Side Story news, it may very well not be.  I will be posting any and all news pertaining to the topic of the thread and I encourage others to do likewise but by the very nature of news itself, I will care more about some matters than I do others.

I hope that adequately clarifies my position and the intent of this thread.

Viva la Fuck You, Disney.

Replies From View

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 26, 2019, 11:20:19 PM
I don't agree with Disney's decision to not release the film under the 20th Century Fox label, as opposed to the Disney one, given that West Side Story is not a kids film but that's a separate issue.

The original isn't.  But they are not making the original West Side Story, they are doing a remake which could well be a family film for all we know.  It's the story of Romeo and Juliet set in the relatively modern day, with singing and dancing.  It's not outside the realms of my imagination for that to be made in a manner that is suitable for all ages.

Hey, Punk!

Disney will be the sole cultural wing of the new Hyper-Authoritarian Capitalism sweeping the globe.

greenman

Quote from: Sin Agog on April 26, 2019, 07:02:18 PM
Is Disney largely to blame for why adult animation never particularly took off here the way it did in Japan or Russia?  I can't think of any reason why the fact that something's drawn should make it belong to any particular age group.

I think you could argue that really animation being focused on cartoon shorts from the earliest days pretty firmly entrenched the idea that it was a medium aimed at children in the west, Disney weren't alone in taking part in that. the USSR obviously wasn't exposed to that to nearly the same degree and I'd say the situation in Japan is really more an outgrowth of manga being a very diverse medium, maybe also somewhat of a response to Hollywood films massive scale by the 80's in a medium were this didn't push the budget as hard.

Avril Lavigne

Oh oh OH.  Fuck Disney for the scene in Ralph Breaks The Internet in which Vanellope introduces the Disney Princesses to the concept of casual wear, after which they're all shown lounging in tumblr/instagram-ready modern casual outfits with designs & slogans based off their personal brands, all of which Disney then sold as real-world products.  Probably the most transparently cynical marketing I've ever seen in a film, the whole scene basically ground the story to a halt for a 5 minute clothes commercial.

Replies From View

What the fuck is Ralph Breaks the Internet?  Sounds so obviously shit from the title that you'd be churlish to complain that it is.

Quote from: Avril Lavigne on May 02, 2019, 11:10:51 AM
Oh oh OH.  Fuck Disney for the scene in Ralph Breaks The Internet in which Vanellope introduces the Disney Princesses to the concept of casual wear, after which they're all shown lounging in tumblr/instagram-ready modern casual outfits with designs & slogans based off their personal brands, all of which Disney then sold as real-world products.  Probably the most transparently cynical marketing I've ever seen in a film, the whole scene basically ground the story to a halt for a 5 minute clothes commercial.
I hate to say it, as cynical as it was I really liked that bit and loved some of the designs of the hoodies too.

Avril Lavigne

Quote from: Replies From View on May 02, 2019, 12:45:49 PM
What the fuck is Ralph Breaks the Internet?  Sounds so obviously shit from the title that you'd be churlish to complain that it is.

Wreck It Ralph 2.  I actually liked the first one quite a lot so I was really hoping that the sequel would be just as good in spite of the title and premise.

SavageHedgehog

If the Disney Princesses scene and the bit where Venelope sings a Disney princess song but, get this!, all the stuff she sings about are kind of gross aren't the two worst scenes I see in a cinema this year I'll, er, be quite disappointed.

Other than that it wasn't that bad, just disappointing, but those two scenes, ugh!

St_Eddie

Quote from: Avril Lavigne on May 02, 2019, 11:10:51 AM
Oh oh OH.  Fuck Disney for the scene in Ralph Breaks The Internet in which Vanellope introduces the Disney Princesses to the concept of casual wear, after which they're all shown lounging in tumblr/instagram-ready modern casual outfits with designs & slogans based off their personal brands, all of which Disney then sold as real-world products.  Probably the most transparently cynical marketing I've ever seen in a film, the whole scene basically ground the story to a halt for a 5 minute clothes commercial.

The whole movie was essentially one big advert for Disney.  An exercise in self-promotion.

Fuck you, Disney.

madhair60

I enjoyed the original Wrecking it Ralph but there's no way I'm watching the sequel - fuck that

At least they didn't make the Sonic movie...

Although, Paramount are only second to Disney when it comes to cuntery.

Cuellar

Quote from: St_Eddie on May 02, 2019, 03:41:16 PM
The whole movie was essentially one big advert for Disney.  An exercise in self-promotion.

Fuck you, Disney.

All Hollywood films are basically extended adverts, aren't they? All the superhero ones I've seen recently have been. Superhero speeding around in an Audi, looking at his posh watch, drinking...I dunno...Chivas Regal or something. Using an iPhone.

Oh wait! They're all Disney, aren't they?! Fuck you, Disney!

St_Eddie

Quote from: goinggoinggone on May 02, 2019, 04:01:15 PM
...Paramount are only second to Disney when it comes to cuntery.

Nah, that would be Sony Pictures.

Quote from: Cuellar on May 02, 2019, 04:30:46 PM
All Hollywood films are basically extended adverts, aren't they? All the superhero ones I've seen recently have been. Superhero speeding around in an Audi, looking at his posh watch, drinking...I dunno...Chivas Regal or something. Using an iPhone.

There are Hollywood movies which are just that; movies.  Sadly it does seem to be increasingly the case that movies are being used to promote merchandise but there's still plenty of movies which exist simply to spin an entertaining yarn and not to sell products.  Movies not made by Disney.

Quote from: Cuellar on May 02, 2019, 04:30:46 PMOh wait! They're all Disney, aren't they?! Fuck you, Disney!

For the most part, yes.  Fuck you, Disney.

Quote from: St_Eddie on May 02, 2019, 04:42:33 PM
Nah, that would be Sony Pictures.

For the most part, yes.  Fuck you, Disney.

Sony are pretty close, but the reason I place Paramount so high on the shitpile, is the way they have treated their back-catalogue over the years.  They've always been the worst when it comes to their DVD-output and have never hesitated to shaft the U.K comsumer, often skipping extras they own the rights to.  They also dumped their back-catalogue in Warner Bros lap a few years ago in an atempt to "focus only on creating franchises" and while running Star Trek, Transformers and (of all things) G.I Joe into the ground, they got into the habbit of releasing different special editions with different extras, in different stores at the same time, knowing the geeks will shovel them all up, particularly the Star Trek crowd.  To be fair, Disney are probably guilty of the same bullshit, but I'm pretty sure it was Paramount that tried it first...and I find it difficult to ignore, because while Disney makes films I generally don't care about, Paramount will occasionally put out a film that is genuinely worth watching.


St_Eddie

Quote from: Monsieur Verdoux on May 07, 2019, 06:50:22 PM
'Disneyland Memorial Orgy' artwork by Wally Wood (NSFW): https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B1%2F4%2F2%2F5%2F5%2F14255075%5D%2Csizedata%5B850x600%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D

Excellent.  I shall purchase a print of this, frame it and hang it, pride of place within my living room.  That way, when guests come over, I can usher them into my flat and forcibly tie them to a chair and make them stare at the picture, all the while bellowing "Fuck you, Disney" into their ears until they bleed and hopefully in doing so, indoctrinate them in the ways of The League Against the Mouse.  I expect to lose many friends by doing this and possibly gain a little prison time but if just one of them sees the error of their ways and refuses to buy a ticket to another Disney feature, then it will have been all worthwhile.

chveik


St_Eddie

#239
Quote from: chveik on May 08, 2019, 03:57:59 PM
Disney-Fox potential releases schedule:

https://www.waltdisneystudios.com/assets/disney-release-schedule-5.7.19.pdf

MOR STAR WARS

MOR SUPERHEROS

MOR SEQUELS AND SPIN-OFFS

MOR LIVE ACTION REMAKES

MOR OLD MAN INDIANA JONES

MOR AVATAR

And to think that they say that creativity is dead within Hollywood.

Fuck you, Disney.