The marriage of action cartoons to merchandising is hardly unique to western animation. Japan only gets away with high amounts of action anime because of absurd BRD pricing and merchandising anything that remotely catches on six ways from Sunday.
Anime is by and large a marketing machine for pre-existing manga, light novels, and VNs (and lately, mobile games), where the real profit is. Even unpopular anime tend to skyrocket the original's sales and bolster other spinoffs (eg a light novel with a manga AND an anime adaptation). This is for pretty much everything though, not just things that get popular. BRDs may be expensive (as is all media in Japan), but for the vast majority of things, that's a drop in the bucket compared to all the other money coming in from anime.
If they go broadly self-aware with it, it could work. The first movie holds up somewhat despite itching with 90s tropes because of some of the cornier and less referential humor and the almost Mel-Brooks-esque ending where Bill Murray comes out of nowhere to save the team and Swackhammer mistakes him for Dan Aykroyd.
If they go broadly self-aware with it, it could work. The first movie holds up somewhat despite itching with 90s tropes because of some of the cornier and less referential humor and the almost Mel-Brooks-esque ending where Bill Murray comes out of nowhere to save the team and Swackhammer mistakes him for Dan Aykroyd.
Not going to lie, I loved the shit out of that joke.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
It was bad enough as a season ender when it would have been fairly likely they would have rescued him next season but as a series ender? NOPE NOPE NOPE.
Even watching it on Netflix and being able to see the queue, I sort of just started marathoning the last few episodes, and was convinced I had one more episode left until it just took me back to the Netflix menu. It was jarring, to say the least.
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
I am genuinely surprised that, after all these years Netflix STILL doesn't have a playlist feature. Every time I've had to contact support I've suggested it. It would be almost trivial to implement.
I am genuinely surprised that, after all these years Netflix STILL doesn't have a playlist feature. Every time I've had to contact support I've suggested it. It would be almost trivial to implement.
Don't you just hit the little plus next to the video?
what do you mean by playlist? i can add shows to a "list" and i can turn on the auto play if i want...and netflix has recently watched in addition to the 'my list'
I am genuinely surprised that, after all these years Netflix STILL doesn't have a playlist feature. Every time I've had to contact support I've suggested it. It would be almost trivial to implement.
I don't think it's a feature we'll ever get, because Netflix doesn't want people to be able to flip something on and just let it run for hours. Pretty sure it's some combination of licensing and bandwidth, that they keep the viewer from streaming endlessly to save money.
Then you have Hulu, where you can make a playlist, but the playlist removes each item as you watch it so it sort of self-destructs by using it.
But it automatically queues between episodes of shows, at least on the Wii U version (only stopped when the Wii U's automatic powerdown feature kicks in, which can be turned off or may not be present in other models), so it's not about stopping people from running shows endlessly if they forget to stop it.
But it automatically queues between episodes of shows, at least on the Wii U version (only stopped when the Wii U's automatic powerdown feature kicks in, which can be turned off or may not be present in other models), so it's not about stopping people from running shows endlessly if they forget to stop it.
That shops after so long though and you get the "are you still watching?" notice.
Separate thing, but there's a petition out to have Elsa be revealed to be lesbian in the next Frozen movie.
It would be an interesting thing. If they went further than, say, Nick did with Korra and Asami (where it's obviously there and confirmed by the creators but if you squint at it right they're still just good friends and so you can get away with airing it in places like Russia), would the fact that it would be locked out of quite a few international markets outweigh the fact that this is Disney (who is "kiss my ass" rich) and Frozen (which is "kiss my ass" big), plus them getting a "first" in history books or something which accrues goodwill.
It seems unlikely given Disney's target demographic.
+5
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
I don't care either way if they did something with her sexuality, as I think it's very vague in general just because of how the story isn't really about her and it got lost a bit with the rewrites and change from villain to just exiled princess.
But what I don't look forward to, which will totes happen, is that because Disney chooses not to, for whatever reasons, they will be hella pilloried for it. Because this is the world we live in now.
I don't care either way if they did something with her sexuality, as I think it's very vague in general just because of how the story isn't really about her and it got lost a bit with the rewrites and change from villain to just exiled princess.
But what I don't look forward to, which will totes happen, is that because Disney chooses not to, for whatever reasons, they will be hella pilloried for it. Because this is the world we live in now.
I'm okay with them keeping sexuality ambiguous unless there is a compelling story reason for it to come up. I mean isn't the target audience still in that eww boys/girls have cuties phase?
+4
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I have issues with people telling someone how to write a story to fit with a specific agenda when that Characters sexuality or desire for a non familial relationship is never addressed in the movie and thats kind of the point.
Also if you think Let it go was a coming out Anthem you kinda missed the point . Letting go was not a good thing it kind of almost doomed her entire nation.
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
I don't care either way if they did something with her sexuality, as I think it's very vague in general just because of how the story isn't really about her and it got lost a bit with the rewrites and change from villain to just exiled princess.
But what I don't look forward to, which will totes happen, is that because Disney chooses not to, for whatever reasons, they will be hella pilloried for it. Because this is the world we live in now.
I'm okay with them keeping sexuality ambiguous unless there is a compelling story reason for it to come up. I mean isn't the target audience still in that eww boys/girls have cuties phase?
This sounds like a nice argument, but it doesn't really have any foothold in reality. Heterosexual relationships are plentiful in these films despite the prevalence of "cooties", but homosexual relationships are non-existent to the point that the people who desperately want to see one are fighting over imaginary scraps, like the sauna scene in Frozen.
Plus, when you say there needs to be a compelling story reason, what constitutes a "compelling story reason"? Yet again, it is a nice idea, but it's too subjective. For some people, a story featuring a homosexual couple is compelling in and of itself, often because they are desperate for representation and validation of their lifestyle in popular media. For others, they'll view any diversity, no matter how it is presented, as shoehorned in by the liberal agenda, and detrimental to the film. You can't win when it has to be for a "compelling story reason" because nothing can ever be compelling enough.
So, yeah, there isn't a good reason to not have homosexual relationships in movies, let alone Disney movies. But it isn't going to happen, because they've got to cater to American AND international squeamishness. And people should absolutely criticize Disney for it- not because it'll change THIS Disney movie,or the next one, or even the ten after that, but because you have to fight for these things if you want to change peoples minds. You have to expose them to the idea that homosexual relationships aren't taboo and exclusively for adult films. Maybe they won't be convinced, but they definitely won't be convinced if you just sit back and take it, so you might as well try.
I don't care either way if they did something with her sexuality, as I think it's very vague in general just because of how the story isn't really about her and it got lost a bit with the rewrites and change from villain to just exiled princess.
But what I don't look forward to, which will totes happen, is that because Disney chooses not to, for whatever reasons, they will be hella pilloried for it. Because this is the world we live in now.
I'm okay with them keeping sexuality ambiguous unless there is a compelling story reason for it to come up. I mean isn't the target audience still in that eww boys/girls have cuties phase?
This sounds like a nice argument, but it doesn't really have any foothold in reality. Heterosexual relationships are plentiful in these films despite the prevalence of "cooties", but homosexual relationships are non-existent to the point that the people who desperately want to see one are fighting over imaginary scraps, like the sauna scene in Frozen.
Plus, when you say there needs to be a compelling story reason, what constitutes a "compelling story reason"? Yet again, it is a nice idea, but it's too subjective. For some people, a story featuring a homosexual couple is compelling in and of itself, often because they are desperate for representation and validation of their lifestyle in popular media. For others, they'll view any diversity, no matter how it is presented, as shoehorned in by the liberal agenda, and detrimental to the film. You can't win when it has to be for a "compelling story reason" because nothing can ever be compelling enough.
So, yeah, there isn't a good reason to not have homosexual relationships in movies, let alone Disney movies. But it isn't going to happen, because they've got to cater to American AND international squeamishness. And people should absolutely criticize Disney for it- not because it'll change THIS Disney movie,or the next one, or even the ten after that, but because you have to fight for these things if you want to change peoples minds. You have to expose them to the idea that homosexual relationships aren't taboo and exclusively for adult films. Maybe they won't be convinced, but they definitely won't be convinced if you just sit back and take it, so you might as well try.
It's really interesting to see the wildly different perspectives people interested in social justice have on Frozen. Some think it's feminist, some think it's shallow faux-feminism, some decry it for being radically different than the story it was based on (because there were apparently more female characters in the original story), some think Elsa's arc was an allegory for LGBT issues, etc.
Zootopia was much more of a message movie than Frozen was, IMO.
If they were truly thinking of the children, they would have already fixed this problem to help alleviate the ostracizing gay children get. Think of the children is just code for "don't make me think or change ever"
If they were truly thinking of the children, they would have already fixed this problem to help alleviate the ostracizing gay children get. Think of the children is just code for "don't make me think or change ever"
Well think of the Children is never really about the Children, so yes.
Disney's core audience is the suburban nuclear family. They -welcome- anyone with money, but their bread and butter is where a large portion of prejudices and paranoia are still core values. I'm sure a ton of people at Disney would love the next Pixar movie to be Inside Out 2: Coming Out, but the people who make the decisions are more likely to be in the same mindset as the folks who won't make female Avatar action figures.
+1
Options
CokomonOur butts are worth fighting for!Registered Userregular
Which will we have first: a lesbian Disney princess or a female led Marvel movie?
Disney's core audience is the suburban nuclear family. They -welcome- anyone with money, but their bread and butter is where a large portion of prejudices and paranoia are still core values. I'm sure a ton of people at Disney would love the next Pixar movie to be Inside Out 2: Coming Out, but the people who make the decisions are more likely to be in the same mindset as the folks who won't make female Avatar action figures.
There is almost no chance of a lesbian Disney princess happening before a female led Marvel movie. Even though Disney/Marvel is hesitant to pull the trigger, female led action movies are an established thing that have proven they can make money with stuff like Tomb Raider and The Hunger Games (to the extent that you could call it an action movie). Lesbian princess cartoon? That's uncharted territory.
Disney's core audience is the suburban nuclear family. They -welcome- anyone with money, but their bread and butter is where a large portion of prejudices and paranoia are still core values. I'm sure a ton of people at Disney would love the next Pixar movie to be Inside Out 2: Coming Out, but the people who make the decisions are more likely to be in the same mindset as the folks who won't make female Avatar action figures.
Also: China.
I acknowledged that further up. But you'd have to wonder if Disney isn't just willing to take the hit, especially if it's an established and highly-beloved franchise.
I don't think it will happen either, but there would be few better chances for Disney for a good long time.
Disney's core audience is the suburban nuclear family. They -welcome- anyone with money, but their bread and butter is where a large portion of prejudices and paranoia are still core values. I'm sure a ton of people at Disney would love the next Pixar movie to be Inside Out 2: Coming Out, but the people who make the decisions are more likely to be in the same mindset as the folks who won't make female Avatar action figures.
Also: China.
I acknowledged that further up. But you'd have to wonder if Disney isn't just willing to take the hit, especially if it's an established and highly-beloved franchise.
I don't think it will happen either, but there would be few better chances for Disney for a good long time.
Considering China is passing the U.S. for the biggest single movie market in the world, I doubt it.
This is why Hollywood will continue to struggle with race, gender and sexuality in casting and story for a looooooong time.
Posts
Anime is by and large a marketing machine for pre-existing manga, light novels, and VNs (and lately, mobile games), where the real profit is. Even unpopular anime tend to skyrocket the original's sales and bolster other spinoffs (eg a light novel with a manga AND an anime adaptation). This is for pretty much everything though, not just things that get popular. BRDs may be expensive (as is all media in Japan), but for the vast majority of things, that's a drop in the bucket compared to all the other money coming in from anime.
If they go broadly self-aware with it, it could work. The first movie holds up somewhat despite itching with 90s tropes because of some of the cornier and less referential humor and the almost Mel-Brooks-esque ending where Bill Murray comes out of nowhere to save the team and Swackhammer mistakes him for Dan Aykroyd.
n. Very n.
Not going to lie, I loved the shit out of that joke.
Super Boy said it best.
Lagaan may be a jerk, a big one. But he treats Miss M well.
Miss M, how ever, abuses her powers and leaves her does comatose.
And what she did to SB...
And it was still kinda a gut punch.
But man, that cliffhanger ending...
I recently rewatched the series.
Well...most of the series.
I skipped that last episode.
Let's Plays of Japanese Games
Don't you just hit the little plus next to the video?
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
I don't think it's a feature we'll ever get, because Netflix doesn't want people to be able to flip something on and just let it run for hours. Pretty sure it's some combination of licensing and bandwidth, that they keep the viewer from streaming endlessly to save money.
Then you have Hulu, where you can make a playlist, but the playlist removes each item as you watch it so it sort of self-destructs by using it.
That shops after so long though and you get the "are you still watching?" notice.
It would be an interesting thing. If they went further than, say, Nick did with Korra and Asami (where it's obviously there and confirmed by the creators but if you squint at it right they're still just good friends and so you can get away with airing it in places like Russia), would the fact that it would be locked out of quite a few international markets outweigh the fact that this is Disney (who is "kiss my ass" rich) and Frozen (which is "kiss my ass" big), plus them getting a "first" in history books or something which accrues goodwill.
But what I don't look forward to, which will totes happen, is that because Disney chooses not to, for whatever reasons, they will be hella pilloried for it. Because this is the world we live in now.
I'm okay with them keeping sexuality ambiguous unless there is a compelling story reason for it to come up. I mean isn't the target audience still in that eww boys/girls have cuties phase?
I wish this were so
Also if you think Let it go was a coming out Anthem you kinda missed the point . Letting go was not a good thing it kind of almost doomed her entire nation.
This sounds like a nice argument, but it doesn't really have any foothold in reality. Heterosexual relationships are plentiful in these films despite the prevalence of "cooties", but homosexual relationships are non-existent to the point that the people who desperately want to see one are fighting over imaginary scraps, like the sauna scene in Frozen.
Plus, when you say there needs to be a compelling story reason, what constitutes a "compelling story reason"? Yet again, it is a nice idea, but it's too subjective. For some people, a story featuring a homosexual couple is compelling in and of itself, often because they are desperate for representation and validation of their lifestyle in popular media. For others, they'll view any diversity, no matter how it is presented, as shoehorned in by the liberal agenda, and detrimental to the film. You can't win when it has to be for a "compelling story reason" because nothing can ever be compelling enough.
So, yeah, there isn't a good reason to not have homosexual relationships in movies, let alone Disney movies. But it isn't going to happen, because they've got to cater to American AND international squeamishness. And people should absolutely criticize Disney for it- not because it'll change THIS Disney movie,or the next one, or even the ten after that, but because you have to fight for these things if you want to change peoples minds. You have to expose them to the idea that homosexual relationships aren't taboo and exclusively for adult films. Maybe they won't be convinced, but they definitely won't be convinced if you just sit back and take it, so you might as well try.
/endrant
Let's Plays of Japanese Games
This is basically the only reason
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
Zootopia was much more of a message movie than Frozen was, IMO.
Well think of the Children is never really about the Children, so yes.
Twitter: Cokomon | dA: Cokomon | Tumblr: Cokomon-art | XBL / NNID / Steam: Cokomon
Also: China.
Let's Plays of Japanese Games
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
I acknowledged that further up. But you'd have to wonder if Disney isn't just willing to take the hit, especially if it's an established and highly-beloved franchise.
I don't think it will happen either, but there would be few better chances for Disney for a good long time.
Considering China is passing the U.S. for the biggest single movie market in the world, I doubt it.
This is why Hollywood will continue to struggle with race, gender and sexuality in casting and story for a looooooong time.