F
Disney, which is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year, has faced numerous challenges in the past year. Despite receiving a bucket of ice-cold water as a symbolic gift, the company has experienced a series of disappointments, such as a decline in box office sales for the Ant-Man sequel, lower-than-expected international numbers for the Little Mermaid remake, and lower grosses for the Indiana Jones sequel. These struggles continued into November, with The Marvels and Disney’s 100th-birthday cartoon, Wish, both failing to meet expectations. This is the first time since 2014, excluding the pandemic year, that Disney has not produced a billion-dollar hit.
From a financial perspective, the only positive aspects were Elemental and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3, as they maintained their success despite underperforming during their opening weekends. While Guardians received favorable reviews, critics have not been overly impressed with the overall lineup. This is in contrast to 2019, the year before the pandemic, when the company had seven movies that earned over a billion dollars. Even if not all of them received stellar reviews, the fact that more than half of critics did not actively hate The Lion King is still considered a success, especially in hindsight.
What caused the issue? Some people are happily claiming that Disney has become “woke” and therefore unsuccessful, but this indicates a lack of understanding of both words in the rhyme, as well as a high level of sensitivity among the audience. Any parents who are hesitant about something as harmless as Disney’s supposed “wokeness”, which simply means occasionally having women and people of color as main characters in movies, will likely encounter difficulties functioning in almost any non-faith-based entertainment setting. (In reality, the company’s long-standing habit of only including small, groundbreaking representations of diversity is likely off-putting to “woke” audiences, and probably goes unnoticed by the general family audience.)
Some individuals who are more interested in technology and those who are strongly devoted to the traditional theatrical experience may argue that Disney Plus, the company’s streaming service launched right before the pandemic, is a better option. Initially, the company seemed well-prepared for a prolonged shutdown of theaters, with a vast collection of Disney, Marvel, and Star Wars content, as well as new TV shows. However, as the pandemic continued, the number of new streaming series became overwhelming and the expectation that all Disney-related content would be available on the streaming service became widespread. Three consecutive Pixar movies were released on streaming instead of theaters, with Lightyear being the only one that truly felt like a streaming spinoff. Black Widow was released simultaneously on premium VOD and in theaters. Encanto was added to Disney Plus just one month after its theatrical release. The Star Wars franchise abruptly shifted to being exclusively for TV and has remained so for the past four years, with no set dates for new movies.
Several of these choices were logical at the time, considering the uncertain circumstances surrounding the ever-changing Covid-19 pandemic. However, as others have noted, Disney’s powerful branding may have made it more susceptible to a less profitable and challenging shift to streaming. The average viewer may not be aware that Universal Pictures and Peacock have the same parent company (or that Peacock even exists). While they may choose to wait for movies to be available on streaming platforms, there is not widespread recognition that films like Jurassic World Dominion or M3gan are Universal productions and will eventually be featured on Peacock. In contrast, it is impossible to miss the fact that Disney films are released on Disney Plus, and even casual viewers are aware that Disney also owns Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars, as they frequently advertise their lineup of characters under one brand. On the other hand, Paramount may only have a strong connection with Star Trek, while the average person may not associate Mission: Impossible, Transformers, or Eddie Murphy’s 1980s films with the studio. Disney’s omnipresence may have made it more challenging to convince audiences to pay full price for theatrical releases.
The Disney corporation is a dominant force in branding, with far-reaching implications that extend beyond basic consumer economics. As of the late 2010s, Disney has carefully organized and calculated its main brand and sub-brands, including its nearly century-old Walt Disney Animation features, modern-day institution Pixar, the immensely popular Marvel superhero universe, the beloved sci-fi and fantasy world of Lucasfilm’s Star Wars franchise, and a consistent stream of live-action adaptations of classic cartoons. The acquisition of 20th Century Fox was intended to add a variety of “normal” films to this lineup, but in reality, it mostly resulted in horror movies and the continuation of the Avatar franchise.
However, what occurs when a majority of a studio’s releases appear to be interconnected, either narratively or spiritually? The latest addition, Wish, features catchy songs, a determined heroine, and charming animation. However, it also goes to great lengths to connect a century’s worth of Disney Animation Easter eggs, ultimately becoming a prequel of sorts to the entire studio’s library. While some of these references are clever, others feel forced and clutter the film’s plot with self-referential nods. Interestingly, Wish’s peculiar plotline, in which a seemingly benevolent but actually power-hungry king seizes control of his subjects’ greatest desires with the vague promise of occasionally granting them, flirts with self-criticism. As the film itself points out through a post-credits scene, “When You Wish Upon a Star” has become synonymous with Disney as a theme song. It is easy to interpret King Magnifico (voiced by Chris Pine) as a stand-in for Disney itself, capitalizing on the public’s wishes and dreams only to deliver superficial and self-serving entertainment in return – essentially commodifying them.
However, Wish is somewhat convoluted and fails to fully convey its thematic idea. Additionally, its otherwise heartwarming message about making your own wishes come true is diminished by the inclusion of various magical elements such as the fairy godmother from Cinderella and the “wishing star” from Pinocchio. This aspect of the film feels reminiscent of nonsensical astrology and detracts from the overall message. Similarly, the strong and relatable charisma of the actors in The Marvels is overshadowed by excessive mythologizing and obligatory action scenes, a common trend in Marvel projects. It appears that this film’s solution was to incorporate unnecessary Marvel elements into the story, only to hastily remove them at the last minute, resulting in a charming yet confusing movie. It is no surprise that audiences were more receptive to Elemental; despite its flaws, it stays true to its name by focusing on fundamental characters and themes rather than relying on pre-established franchises. For now, Pixar has managed to avoid the feeling of a brand consuming itself, although the release of Inside Out 2 next summer will put this to the test.
Bypass the advertisement for the newsletter.
after newsletter promotion
It’s not just about having too many sequels, which could be said about any major film studio. It’s more about the constant branding that turns every logo into a reminder of past successes. (Does every Marvel project really need to begin with a constantly updated two-minute montage of characters, moments, and even screenplay pages?) There are still enough Disney fans, both adults and children, who get excited about everything Disney has to offer; some of the company’s biggest hits in recent years have been remakes of their own classic Disney films, despite criticism from some. While the live-action remake of The Little Mermaid may not have made a huge profit, it still earned impressive box office numbers in the US, which is more than can be said for movies like Solo, Encanto, The Marvels, and The Jungle Cruise. However, this is likely one of the least creatively successful aspects of Disney’s brand; it’s essentially Disney presenting Disney by Disney, something that audiences have been trained to expect. Through Searchlight, Disney’s upscale division of Fox, they still release fantastic movies like the upcoming Poor Things and All of Us Strangers. However, they still seem unsure of what to do with films targeted towards adults that may not be obvious awards contenders; they recently sold off the Jeff Nichols film, The Bikeriders, with what appeared to be little thought or concern.
This company relies heavily on its acquisitions for branding and is willing to blend together various forms of media, including movies, TV, theme parks, and characters from the past century (some not even their own), creating a homogenous mix of entertainment under the iconic mouse ears. Disney has mastered the art of marketing itself as a one-stop destination and has gained a devoted following of corporate fans. However, this success has resulted in the neglect of any creative desires outside of those from shareholders and superfans, leading to a constant demand for more content.
Source: theguardian.com
