More fitting of Unpopular Opinions I'd say
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
13 points (100.0% liked)
Showerthoughts
34111 readers
941 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
More unpopular than Disney live action remakes?
Not sure but certainly not a showerthought
Omg, did I write, "not a showerthought." I'm crushed. How did I let this happen?
Maybe you need to watch more Cameron Diaz, I don't know
What, now you hate Cameron Diaz? What do you like, white bread?
Wait why would I hate Cameron Diaz? What are you, like an internet troll or something?
First things first. It's Diaz.
Second it's Disney so yeah they're trying to appeal to younger audiences, that's kind of their thing.
Third she's 52 years old. Nobody wants to watch premenopausal Snow White live with 7 CGI dwarves and try to score Josh Brolin as the prince.
Lastly, if you fall asleep at 52, at least in America your ass is going to a retirement home. The only prince coming to save you is the sweet release of death.
They are making movies to cater to a zeitgeist curated by a vocal minority via censorship, harassment, and emotional manipulation.
If they stayed true to the source material for live action or CGI remake, they would do fine. What they have been making is live action reimagining through a minority contempory lens that alienates the majority of their fanbase.
The worst part of their new direction is the pandering. Don't just make an established character that was white a minority or alter the story to conform to some new philosophy, that is just lazy and everybody sees it. They need to come up with new stories with new new characters from a marginalized minority, like Moana or Lilo and Stitch. Nobody will honestly care about seeing a world through a minority charactersls view. Viewers didn't care with Pocahontas or Mulan because they were an honest attempt at making an origional and good movie that happens to feature an American minority.
Don't make Cinderella black, make an original story about a black character like Black Panther. Don't make an empowered feminist, make an empowered feminist and tell her origional story like Mulan. Tell us new stories and make them appealing because they are interesting.
Also don't beat a dead horse with a sequel that can never be as good as the first one because their story is told and trying to capitalize with "but wait, there's more" after the book is closed.
They are going after low-hanging fruit one person asked for and wonder why few are satisfied.
Aren't they just releasing anything, just to avoid copyrights expiring?
That is part of the motivation. They are a media company and need to keep releasing anything they can to make more money. They are seemingly unable to come up with fresh IP at an acceptable pace, so they just shit out live actions and sequels that are just financial black holes.
That's my point, it can't be done.
Why would Disney appeal to an older audience? Well, they do since they bought all that other stuff(Fox, Marvel, NatGeo, etc) they have no reason to with their animated ones. The ones they make now continue to be the same themes, generally. But with live action remakes they are trying to speak to both young and older audiences and it doesn't work as well. They should stick with the CGI remakes.
They should try to appeal to the older generation because, for one, kids aren't exactly known for their distinguished taste. The main reason is that is who these movies were sold to. You want to hype up some OG Disney you have to get OG Disney fans excited. Disney can do what they want but if they focused on appealing to the children that fell in love with the content the rest would follow.
They are just bad at it. They try but they must not have enough research plus they are a corporation so they just care about making money. Most of the new stuff sequels and all are trash. I liked the lion king CGI version and the CGI in Avatar, but haven't seen the second one yet, so I can't judge. I like what they are doing in Marvel. That is what appeals. If they redo every 2D cartoon movie growing up into decent CGI and to the T of the story, we might have a good set of newer movies. That is how they can appeal. The other new stuff not so much. They have a lot of improving to do, there.
Andor was dope, tho.
This shower thought was taken back to its home planet and never seen again.