The truth is, it doesn't.

So we're left with, 1) what they did; 2) making him straight and known; or 3) never mentioning it.


Does it take away anything if they go with route 3?

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Finn should have been the catalyst for a mass uprising of stormtroopers in the third movie.

---

I like to think of the third movie as a bad dream that never happened

---

I'll just leave this space battle gif here.

Is that real? They were riding horses on the surface of a ship in space while in a massive battle? Holy crap.

OnlyForNow said:

---

The truth is, it doesn't.

So we're left with, 1) what they did; 2) making him straight and known; or 3) never mentioning it.


Does it take away anything if they go with route 3?

---

For you, no. But having numerous gay friends, for them and having heard what they've gone through their entire lives, it absolutely takes a lot away.

Maybe just understand that not every movie is for you and move on from it.

AGC said:

---

bluefire579 said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Doesn't have to be all straight, doesn't have to be all white. Why does this issue keep coming up.

I already stated, that had the MCs been all non-white it would have been fine and not changed the movie at all (Soul, Mauna, etc.)

The fact that the young MC is gay, added zero to the storyline/plot, it was only there to pander to the alphabet crowd. If him being gay, had played some sort of character development role, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Making him gay, just to make him gay is stupid. His love interest has about 25 seconds of screen time, and is mentioned MAYBE 2-3 other times in the movie.

---

But why does someone being gay have to add to the plot? Why does their existence need to be justified as opposed to that of a straight person?

---

Why don't straight people in movies targeted at children have to be justified? You must not be a biologist.

---

Biologist? What the **** are you blabbering about?

OnlyForNow said:

---

Doesn't have to be all straight, doesn't have to be all white. Why does this issue keep coming up.

I already stated, that had the MCs been all non-white it would have been fine and not changed the movie at all (Soul, Mauna, etc.)

The fact that the young MC is gay, added zero to the storyline/plot, it was only there to pander to the alphabet crowd. If him being gay, had played some sort of character development role, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Making him gay, just to make him gay is stupid. His love interest has about 25 seconds of screen time, and is mentioned MAYBE 2-3 other times in the movie.

---

So it had no effect on the film yet you and others have an issue with it…why exactly?

Characters have been largely white and straight for decades yet there have always been other races and orientations out there. Including a gay character and making it a big deal that he's gay would be more pandering than anything. Why can't he just be a character who happens to be gay?

bluefire579 said:

---

AGC said:

---

bluefire579 said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Doesn't have to be all straight, doesn't have to be all white. Why does this issue keep coming up.

I already stated, that had the MCs been all non-white it would have been fine and not changed the movie at all (Soul, Mauna, etc.)

The fact that the young MC is gay, added zero to the storyline/plot, it was only there to pander to the alphabet crowd. If him being gay, had played some sort of character development role, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Making him gay, just to make him gay is stupid. His love interest has about 25 seconds of screen time, and is mentioned MAYBE 2-3 other times in the movie.

---

But why does someone being gay have to add to the plot? Why does their existence need to be justified as opposed to that of a straight person?

---

Why don't straight people in movies targeted at children have to be justified? You must not be a biologist.

---

Biologist? What the **** are you blabbering about?

---

Straight people don't need to be justified in movies with children for obvious reasons. Thus your question setting the two in opposition is nonsensical.

fig96 said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Doesn't have to be all straight, doesn't have to be all white. Why does this issue keep coming up.

I already stated, that had the MCs been all non-white it would have been fine and not changed the movie at all (Soul, Mauna, etc.)

The fact that the young MC is gay, added zero to the storyline/plot, it was only there to pander to the alphabet crowd. If him being gay, had played some sort of character development role, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Making him gay, just to make him gay is stupid. His love interest has about 25 seconds of screen time, and is mentioned MAYBE 2-3 other times in the movie.

---

So it had no effect on the film yet you and others have an issue with it…why exactly?

Characters have been largely white and straight for decades yet there have always been other races and orientations out there. Including a gay character and making it a big deal that he's gay would be more pandering than anything. Why can't he just be a character who happens to be gay?

---

Because it's not incidental but actually promoted that way?

Here's #StrangeWorld breakout star, Jaboukie Young-White on why he's proud to be breaking new ground as the first out gay teenager in a Disney animated film. pic.twitter.com/vlmv7ebP8s

— Ethan Alter (@ethanalter) November 16, 2022

You can't simultaneously promote it and then ask why it's relevant. It is or isn't but it can't be both.

Was it their intention to make the title font the same as Indiana Jones?

The question was brought up by the reporter. Seems like his answer tells us how it is meant to simply be incidental just like having a red head or left handed character where there is no plot focus on their identity, but rather it is just a characteristic of the character because that's how our random world works.

Sea Speed said:

---

Is that real? They were riding horses on the surface of a ship in space while in a massive battle? Holy crap.

---

It's in a planets atmosphere. Maybe 500 feet off the ground.

boy09 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Disney doesn't care if the movie loses money. They care more about pushing a woke agenda. Disney is losing money on it's movies and streaming but the company as a whole is not.

---

I can guarantee you, Disney only cares about making money...

---

Oh...okay. If you say so I guess.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-officials-leaked-videos-pushing-lgbt-agenda-saying-desantis-erase-gay-kids.amp

If I notice someone in a movie that is different than me, I immediately need to know what value they add to the movie. If their identity doesn't move the plot forward somehow, they should have just cast me.

The Collective said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Finn should have been the catalyst for a mass uprising of stormtroopers in the third movie.

---

I like to think of the third movie as a bad dream that never happened

---

I'll just leave this space battle gif here.

---

God it is so bad

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

boy09 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Disney doesn't care if the movie loses money. They care more about pushing a woke agenda. Disney is losing money on it's movies and streaming but the company as a whole is not.

---

I can guarantee you, Disney only cares about making money...

---

Oh...okay. If you say so I guess.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-officials-leaked-videos-pushing-lgbt-agenda-saying-desantis-erase-gay-kids.amp

---

You think these aren't business decisions?

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Is that real? They were riding horses on the surface of a ship in space while in a massive battle? Holy crap.

---

It's in a planets atmosphere. Maybe 500 feet off the ground.

---

As if that makes it any better.

In that clip the actor literally just talked about how it wasn't called out or highlighted in any way, it's just part of who he is. It's as innocuous as it could be. How is that promoting it?

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Core Disney: The successful and natural way of introducing more diversity is to continue introducing more worldwide setting films. Moana (Polynesian), Frozen (Scandinavian), Encanto (Central America), Raya (Asian). Also focus on unique settings (Wreck it Ralph). All of those films have been great and expanded the Disney footprint and fanbase naturally. It didn't feel forced.

---

there is a very natural way to be diverse and those all nailed it. All though I'll say Coco was very superior to Encanto. Another one is Spiderman:into the spiderverse. my kids ate that crap up and it's still probably the best animated feature i've seen in years.

my kids are 15 and 13. I did not have to talk them into watching or rewatching Raya, Coco, Spiderverse, Moana, Shang Chi, Black Panther, etc. I love cartoons and they'll watch them easily. They had 0 interest in Lightyear or Strange World this year, but wanted to dress up and have me dress up with them for minions.

i've said for a while, i don't want anybody to fail for being diverse or even woke. my concern on your failures for being diverse and/or woke diminishes greatly when you pat yourself on the back and make sure everybody knows how diverse/woke you were beforehand and then attack your potential audience for not watching it (Lightyear, Bros, Charlie's Angels, Ghosbusters, etc.)

bluefire579 said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Doesn't have to be all straight, doesn't have to be all white. Why does this issue keep coming up.

I already stated, that had the MCs been all non-white it would have been fine and not changed the movie at all (Soul, Mauna, etc.)

The fact that the young MC is gay, added zero to the storyline/plot, it was only there to pander to the alphabet crowd. If him being gay, had played some sort of character development role, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Making him gay, just to make him gay is stupid. His love interest has about 25 seconds of screen time, and is mentioned MAYBE 2-3 other times in the movie.

---

But why does someone being gay have to add to the plot? Why does their existence need to be justified as opposed to that of a straight person?

---

The issue for most is that the stated goal is to influence children through entertainment. People who pay for a platform or to see a movie generally don't want it to come with someone else's ideas on what their children should be being taught or influenced by.

But for that, there's nothing inherently wrong with adding representation until it becomes an exercise in box checking. Netflix and Amazon are becoming guilty of this, where there is an LGBTQ character in just about every show. I get trying to be inclusive and play to a wide audience, but it has moved beyond that and become a trope. I have to give Netflix credit for being neutral on the whole, though, after refusing to cave to the trans community on Dave Chappelle.

boy09 said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

boy09 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Disney doesn't care if the movie loses money. They care more about pushing a woke agenda. Disney is losing money on it's movies and streaming but the company as a whole is not.

---

I can guarantee you, Disney only cares about making money...

---

Oh...okay. If you say so I guess.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-officials-leaked-videos-pushing-lgbt-agenda-saying-desantis-erase-gay-kids.amp

---

You think these aren't business decisions?

---

Come on man you are being obtuse. Of course they are. But business decisions aren't always about making you money. Business decisions are made all the time that cost money - sometimes intentionally, and sometimes unintentionally.

boy09 said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

boy09 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Disney doesn't care if the movie loses money. They care more about pushing a woke agenda. Disney is losing money on it's movies and streaming but the company as a whole is not.

---

I can guarantee you, Disney only cares about making money...

---

Oh...okay. If you say so I guess.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-officials-leaked-videos-pushing-lgbt-agenda-saying-desantis-erase-gay-kids.amp

---

You think these aren't business decisions?

---

Well not good ones apparently.

These debates are almost always over complicated. Many parents simply will avoid exposing their kids to certain topics, completely relative to the child's age. My kids are teens so that ship has sailed for us. But it's perfectly reasonable to not want to explain to a six year old why the teenage boy had romantic feelings for another teenage boy. Or how two women conceived a baby. Or what global climate change is.

It's not Hollywood's job to tell parents what is appropriate or not for their kids to be exposed to. Nor what we should feel comfortable with relative to their age. And for those that seem to know better than the parents and are vocal about it, sure, you have a right to your opinion but it's not likely to lead to bigger returns at the box office.

All that said, the biggest reason (IMO) that Lightyear tanked is because it just wasn't very good and I suspect that's the case here as well.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Apparently Disney spent $180+ million on a movie called Strange World. It's looking set to lose $100 to $150 million after doing only $28 million globally over the entire 5 day Thanksgiving weekend. It was expected to do $40 million in the US alone. It's projected by some to do $40-$50 million total.

Supposedly it hasn't been advertised well, and that is the reason many are giving for it bombing so hard. I couldn't say since I never really watch TV and stream just about everything. The fact it isn't mentioned here at all might lend some credence to that. The other reason being given is that it has a really obvious and heavy climate change heavy theme with gay main characters. It's basically a woke wet dream of liberal politics and inclusion, and it isn't shy about it

I don't know which one is correct, but after Lightyear, that kind of budget for this kind of movie seems like a horrible idea. It's very obviously going to be niche because of the unmistakable political bent, and it's not a part of some established franchise with a base to draw from. It's also a very out there movie, with very little, if anything, that's universally relatable. This thing seems almost destined to bomb, and I can't believe it was greenlit. I have to wonder if execs saw what was coming and decided not to advertise it to a) not throw good money after bad and b) give it an out.

ETA Also, F16 hasn't picked this up yet either, and it wasn't discussed at all prior to release (at least that I saw). I can buy the lack of advertising theory, but even if it was pushed I don't see it being successful. It's just way too niche and unrelatable for most.

---

not into Disney and know nothing about these kid movies..

but supposedly this one was "woke" as "woke" can be

go woke- go broke!

Global climate change is easy.

"Hey son you know it was a lot hotter when dinosaurs were around right? And then the earth got really cold right? Well it's the end of the cold cycle now".

This is quite possibly the best satire on this topic I have ever seen. Kudos for pointing this out.

bluefire579 said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

The truth is, it doesn't.

So we're left with, 1) what they did; 2) making him straight and known; or 3) never mentioning it.


Does it take away anything if they go with route 3?

---

For you, no. But having numerous gay friends, for them and having heard what they've gone through their entire lives, it absolutely takes a lot away.

Maybe just understand that not every movie is for you and move on from it.

---

A lot of people decided this movie wasn't for them and moved on from it. That's why it bombed at the box office.

Saw a ton of ads for this and figured it was an animated remake of some 1950's sci-fi property.

No idea it was going to get all the angry old white guys so riled up.

They are just so committed to there being nothing extraneous beyond the bare essentials of plot. That's all.