DVDizzy Forum

It's interesting that Raya and the Last Dragon won't be a musical but a fantasy action film with influences of the "Hong Kong action films" instead. Plus the potential of an actual Disney villain to boot? This could turn out to be a really solid movie if it's executed well.

I dunno, wasn't Atlantis bombing due to not having enough musical numbrrs and having too much action scenes for a Disney movie? I can see this going the same way, I mean, if you cut out the praise of the soundtrack, most people don't talk about Moana.

thedisneyspirit wrote:I dunno, wasn't Atlantis bombing due to not having enough musical numbrrs and having too much action scenes for a Disney movie? I can see this going the same way, I mean, if you cut out the praise of the soundtrack, most people don't talk about Moana.

How is it different than Zootopia or any other Pixar film?

marketing was probably the biggest reason. Even I have yet to see it. When it was coming out, I remember seeing one trailer, the initial teaser. That's pretty much it. Oh and that free game (or was it a demo?) that came inside a cereal box.

Also, I hear the movie has a lot of inconsequential one off characters, seemingly as a replacement for the cute sidekick character, which did it no favors.

Kyle wrote:marketing was probably the biggest reason. Even I have yet to see it. When it was coming out, I remember seeing one trailer, the initial teaser. That's pretty much it. Oh and that free game (or was it a demo?) that came inside a cereal box.

Also, I hear the movie has a lot of inconsequential one off characters, seemingly as a replacement for the cute sidekick character, which did it no favors.

In the end Atlantis wasn't a very good movie and it was very boring in my opinion. I give Wise and Trousdale a lot of credit for always going bigger than the Disney box, but in this case they failed.
I'm not too worried about Raya. Disney only had 6 films with music since 2009, but it's not like the ones without did poorly.

I think Atlantis bombed because it was more aimed at teenagers and boys than usual for Disney. Their objective with that was to get a wider audience, but every time they do that (like with Treasure Planet, Prince Caspian, John Carter, etc.) they not only don't attract that part of the audience, but lose their main one, families with little kids and probably girls. I think Raya won't have the same problem.

Yeah, was just about to say, I was a teen male during most of those (for john carter I wasn't, but my tastes haven't changed much anyway), why did none of those grab my interest? I cant explain it.

Big Hero 6 isn't a very good movie either and it made 600 million. I don't think quality has anything to do with it.

D82 wrote:I think Atlantis bombed because it was more aimed at teenagers and boys than usual for Disney. Their objective with that was to get a wider audience, but every time they do that (like with Treasure Planet, Prince Caspian, John Carter, etc.) they not only don't attract that part of the audience, but lose their main one, families with little kids and probably girls. I think Raya won't have the same problem.

I wouldn't say Prince Caspian was aimed more at teenage boys. The original film was a huge blockbuster film because it aimed for families of all ages. The sequel tried to be darker and more mature and grow with the audience like the Harry Potter films did over time but it turned off a lot of their family friendly base. If anything, the casting of Ben Barnes and making Caspian into an older heartthrob rather than the child he was in the books was an attempt to capture the attention of teenage girls since the Twilight craze started around this time as well.

JeanGreyForever wrote:

D82 wrote:I think Atlantis bombed because it was more aimed at teenagers and boys than usual for Disney. Their objective with that was to get a wider audience, but every time they do that (like with Treasure Planet, Prince Caspian, John Carter, etc.) they not only don't attract that part of the audience, but lose their main one, families with little kids and probably girls. I think Raya won't have the same problem.

I wouldn't say Prince Caspian was aimed more at teenage boys. The original film was a huge blockbuster film because it aimed for families of all ages. The sequel tried to be darker and more mature and grow with the audience like the Harry Potter films did over time but it turned off a lot of their family friendly base. If anything, the casting of Ben Barnes and making Caspian into an older heartthrob rather than the child he was in the books was an attempt to capture the attention of teenage girls since the Twilight craze started around this time as well.

Well, with teenagers I was referring to both boys and girls, but, you're right; Prince Caspian is not a perfect example of that. I was actually doubting if I should include it or not, because though it's true that they tried to draw an older demographic with that one, like with the other movies I mentioned; they didn't try to make it more appealing to boys than to girls, as you said.

Not to mention heavy competition from other animation studios as well and other films competing as well during the opening weekends.

Remember Disney Aventurers from the early 2000s? This was Disney attempt to attract boys, the opposite of the Princesses. It failed. At that time, boys wanted nothing to do with Disney Animation. Which is why Disney bought Marvel in 2009.

DisneyEra wrote:Remember Disney Aventurers from the early 2000s? This was Disney attempt to attract boys, the opposite of the Princesses. It failed. At that time, boys wanted nothing to do with Disney Animation. Which is why Disney bought Marvel in 2009.

I always liked this line myself and even had some of the toys. It's a shame it didn't catch on. This is probably why Disney stopped trying to promote Hercules and Tarzan altogether and why for the longest time, the films Aladdin and Peter Pan were basically represented by Jasmine and Tinker Bell only.

Eh, sadly makes sense. During the 2000s Disney was really unpopular and seen as a thing only for girls or babies. The over commercialization of Pooh and the Disney Channel stars certainly didn't help change the reputation.

I think that's why Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars in the first place, to have franchises to sell to boys.

thedisneyspirit wrote:Eh, sadly makes sense. During the 2000s Disney was really unpopular and seen as a thing only for girls or babies. The over commercialization of Pooh and the Disney Channel stars certainly didn't help change the reputation.

I think that's why Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars in the first place, to have franchises to sell to boys.

I remember the mentality towards Disney was that it was only for pre-teen girls because of the Disney Princesses and the Disney Channel stuff like Raven, Hannah Montana, and High School Musical. Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse being used as toddler fodder didn't really help with that image.

Disney did try to use Pixar as their main outlet of selling to boys but I guess Toy Story and Cars wasn't enough. Marvel and Star Wars were definitely purchased for those reasons. The same reasons why the early films got so much flack for neglecting merchandise of the female characters because Disney felt female toys wouldn't sell in boy-oriented franchises. It's the same hypocrisy as to why for the longest time, Disney would never include a single female character on boys' clothing. Even in groups shots, the lone female character would be cut out because the fear was so great that the boy who wore this shirt would reject it for fear of developing cooties or losing his masculinity and even the countless other male characters wouldn't be enough to protect his virtue.

thedisneyspirit wrote:Eh, sadly makes sense. During the 2000s Disney was really unpopular and seen as a thing only for girls or babies. The over commercialization of Pooh and the Disney Channel stars certainly didn't help change the reputation.

I think that's why Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars in the first place, to have franchises to sell to boys.

Disney Channel in the '90s was OK. I've never heard anything bad talked about the '90s Mickey Mouse Club, The Famous Jett Jackson, So Weird & The Jersey. Even early 2000s Disney Channel: Even Steven & Lizzie McGuire. It was post That's So Raven when Disney Channel got bad. It's over reliance on that show's formula: annoying characters & the fake laugh track became the norm for new D channel shows going forward. Also, getting rid of Walt Disney Presents & the old Mickey cartoons in the AM hours was horrible

DisneyEra wrote:

thedisneyspirit wrote:Eh, sadly makes sense. During the 2000s Disney was really unpopular and seen as a thing only for girls or babies. The over commercialization of Pooh and the Disney Channel stars certainly didn't help change the reputation.

I think that's why Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars in the first place, to have franchises to sell to boys.

Disney Channel in the '90s was OK. I've never heard anything bad talked about the '90s Mickey Mouse Club, The Famous Jett Jackson, So Weird & The Jersey. Even early 2000s Disney Channel: Even Steven & Lizzie McGuire. It was post That's So Raven when Disney Channel got bad. It's over reliance on that show's formula: annoying characters & the fake laugh track became the norm for new D channel shows going forward. Also, getting rid of Walt Disney Presents & the old Mickey cartoons in the AM hours was horrible

I actually grew up with those 2000s shows and Disney Channel films so I quite like a lot of them. And the reason they came to embody Disney so much is because they were mega-popular with audiences (or kids anyway) and resonated with them in a way that the 90s and early 2000s shows never did. In the mid-2000s, after shows like Raven, Zack and Cody, Hannah Montana, Wizards, etc. came out, I remember it was in the news that Disney Channel finally beat Nickelodeon in terms of viewers and as the top kids channel. Even Oprah would ask poor children in third-world countries if they had ever heard of Hannah Montana because that's how well known those characters and shows were.

JeanGreyForever wrote:

DisneyEra wrote: Disney Channel in the '90s was OK. I've never heard anything bad talked about the '90s Mickey Mouse Club, The Famous Jett Jackson, So Weird & The Jersey. Even early 2000s Disney Channel: Even Steven & Lizzie McGuire. It was post That's So Raven when Disney Channel got bad. It's over reliance on that show's formula: annoying characters & the fake laugh track became the norm for new D channel shows going forward. Also, getting rid of Walt Disney Presents & the old Mickey cartoons in the AM hours was horrible

I actually grew up with those 2000s shows and Disney Channel films so I quite like a lot of them. And the reason they came to embody Disney so much is because they were mega-popular with audiences (or kids anyway) and resonated with them in a way that the 90s and early 2000s shows never did. In the mid-2000s, after shows like Raven, Zack and Cody, Hannah Montana, Wizards, etc. came out, I remember it was in the news that Disney Channel finally beat Nickelodeon in terms of viewers and as the top kids channel. Even Oprah would ask poor children in third-world countries if they had ever heard of Hannah Montana because that's how well known those characters and shows were.

When Hanna Montana came out in early 2006, D channel hit it's peak. Ratings & merch sales were thru the roof. But it seemed like it was "for the moment" type thing. I mean, is there any Nostalgia right now for Hanna Montana

thedisneyspirit wrote:Eh, sadly makes sense. During the 2000s Disney was really unpopular and seen as a thing only for girls or babies. The over commercialization of Pooh and the Disney Channel stars certainly didn't help change the reputation.

I think that's why Disney bought Marvel and Star Wars in the first place, to have franchises to sell to boys.

A great deal of boys who grew up with Disney in the '90s (like me) were in their teens in the 2000's, and I remember that Disney was pretty reviled in middle/high school. People mocked you if you said you liked Disney out loud. You're right that it was seen as something for babies or little girls. I even went through a phase where I liked Disney less--and looking back, that was partly peer pressure--but grew out of it.

The funny thing is I remember a lot of high schoolers who looooved Spongebob. And Shrek. That was Dreamworks' audience really--teenagers who grew up and thought they were "too cool" for Disney.

DisneyEra wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote: I actually grew up with those 2000s shows and Disney Channel films so I quite like a lot of them. And the reason they came to embody Disney so much is because they were mega-popular with audiences (or kids anyway) and resonated with them in a way that the 90s and early 2000s shows never did. In the mid-2000s, after shows like Raven, Zack and Cody, Hannah Montana, Wizards, etc. came out, I remember it was in the news that Disney Channel finally beat Nickelodeon in terms of viewers and as the top kids channel. Even Oprah would ask poor children in third-world countries if they had ever heard of Hannah Montana because that's how well known those characters and shows were.

When Hanna Montana came out in early 2006, D channel hit it's peak. Ratings & merch sales were thru the roof. But it seemed like it was "for the moment" type thing. I mean, is there any Nostalgia right now for Hanna Montana

https://hellogiggles.com/reviews-covera ... ley-cyrus/
A lot of people have been asking Miley if a Hannah Montana reunion is ever in the cards. I don't think she was very interested, but Disney clearly was.

Beyond Hannah Montana, we've seen a trend of bringing back old shows or rebooting them. Obviously Raven got a revival and now Lizzie McGuire is getting one. Then there was the flack that Kim Possible got for rebooting and not continuing the old series. Zoey 101, a Nickelodeon show, is getting a new series now. Apparently even something for Drake and Josh is in the mix. Even High School Musical got a revival of sorts with a reboot that will feature some guest appearances from the original cast members. I've heard rumors about Wizards of Waverly Place getting something as well so it definitely seems like there's a lot of nostalgia for the shows and films of this era and bringing them back.