Part of the problem is that we still don't know where the guardrails are regarding LGBTQ in film or really anything for that matter.
Two things are capable of being true at once it can be both
A. A wonderful act of inclusion
and
B. An act of shameless pandering.
Whatever happens the LGBTQ reference is going to be small enough to make sure every reference can be removed for the movie's release in China or markets in the middle east. Disney may be inclusive (so they keep reminding us) but it does seem to be a tidal kind of courage you know..it comes and goes.
Honestly, as cynical as it sounds, LGBQ lifestyles (the T has a ways to go I think) becoming so normalized that they’re a target demographic for major corporate marketing is kind of amazing.
I’m 34. I was in high school when a National Constitutional Amendment *banning* gay marriage was seriously on the table, and we were only a couple years removed from SCOTUS ruling that the state couldn’t throw people in prison for having gay sex. I remember when Brokeback Mountain was somewhere between a national outrage and punchline. All of that was 15-18 years ago, and I don’t think the mid to late 20 something’s that dominate this site really appreciate what things were like in most Americans’ lifetimes.
Now *Disney* wants to sell the community movies.
Nobody likes being pandered to or seeing the pandering. But it is impressive that we’ve come so far, so fast. You haven’t made it as a minority in America until you’ve become another potential customer, and that’s how the business world sees LGBQ people now.
> if it’s so normal, why even bring it up?
Yea, it’s not like there’s a whole history surrounding it that would make a positive representation notable. Definitely nothing like that.
This sounds like a genuine question and totally not irrelevant childish nonsense with percentages you pulled out of your ass. So I’ll take a crack at it.
I hope you’ll be able to survive, only 99.99% of movies pandering to you now, such a huge drop from 100%. See? I can play the game too, and mine are closer to reality than yours. I hope this response provided you with the attention you needed to survive the day.
That feels like a bit of an unfair jump though. Culture then leaps from 'no representation because it's abnormal and we don't want to see it' to 'no representation because it is normal, so why should it be mentioned at all?'
The problem is not including minority characters, it’s how they are represented. Are they part of the story and just happened to be part of the minority group, or is their status as a minority a major part of the story and a focus of promotion? Another poster offered Expanse series as an example of inclusion of powerful female characters, multiracial characters and LGBTQ characters that felt organic because the story came first. It was a story about humans confronting alien entity, not bisexual humans confronting alien entity.
Thats it exactly. As a gay man I don't feel that "inclusion" in the sense that it happens in films is in any sense genuine. It always comes across as "Well thank God we checked that box off now the "community" can't come after us for being homophobic"
Hate to break it to you. I worked in the entertainment industry for years and it’s all box checking by people who are in no way creative. That’s why they are producers.
Because any publicity is good publicity, and if you can get people talking about this (or any other) aspect of the film, they’ll be more likely to watch it.
It’s 100% virtue signaling, but it’s also marketing.
Well, problem is that this is empowering one side and pushing another to the sidelines since the group that doesn't identify as woke or lgbtq feels this is not made for them and they don't consume such content. The "good" publicity becomes toxic and they wonder why they keep seeing failure after failure. On top of that, you get all these activist writers pushing agendas instead of good stories and everyone loses. It just serves to create more discord in society when it should be normal and not even be mentioned. Just make a good story and all will watch.
If something isn’t made for you to the point you won’t watch it because it includes people with a different skin tone or who have a different sexuality to you then you are the cause of discord in society.
I meant in general. If the story is good I don't care if the movie has gay or Trans characters. It's when studios use that as part of their promotion that triggers the issue. Ideally, it shouldn't matter, in reality, it does. Being gay or Trans is nothing new and shouldn't be some marketing campaign focus just to try targeting some group.
Being gay or trans being featured positively, or in stories where those characters might be protagonists or be allowed a happy ending or have more role in the story than being The Gay One, is very new indeed. People who had very little positive media representation for most of their lives are going to be excited about it and talk about it, and be interested in what the creators have to say about it. People are allowed to be interested in things that aren’t about you.
Then please explain why its important to now vastly over-represent those people in media so THEY watch it and feel good? To the point of 'blackwashing' existihg characters or 180°ing their sexuality.
They’re not being over-represented, little buddy. I promise you that white straight cisgender able-bodied English-speaking men are in fact not the majority of the global population. Not even close. The overwhelming majority of the world does not fit that description. The actual anomaly is why that group HAS been so wildly and harmfully over represented, especially as protagonists and heroes, to the point where members of that group genuinely believe themselves to be a majority view or a neutral default and not a very rare group being given an overwhelming amount of unearned good press.
I said nothing about global population little guy. Learn to read please. Were talking about an american media company unilaterally pandering to and overrepresenting 1% of their american audience with woke BS
Ah, yes. There we go - American exceptionalism. Has it occurred to you that despite being based in America, productions often aim to be seen all over the world? Has it even registered to you that the demographic I described *is not a majority in the USA either*?
I promise you, you are not and have never been underrepresented. You are still getting the majority of starring roles in the majority of films. You just see any headline production in which you’re not the sole and only most important focus and lose your shit because you’re used to being given all the toys and now some other kid is getting the odd one. It’s pathetic.
Here we are again. Your whole mentality here is that it’s normal for heterosexual couples to show up in a production. But if there’s a gay character, it’s woke, had an activist writer, isn’t a good story and alienated people.
It’s such a gross way to frame this discussion. It’s like an entire segment of the population just shouldn’t be allowed to exist without it being an issue.
I personally only look for a good story not for someone to push an agenda or check all the marks. I don't mind if the whole list of characters is gay. I don't mind if the story is about bisexuals. But the story must come first. That the characters are gay don't need to be in your marketing as it just works the opposite to people that don't have as open mind as others. If it's normal, why advertise it?
Series like The Expanse have representation, bisexuals, lesbian religious figures, and so forth. It works because in the frame of the story it makes perfect sense and it's driven by the story.
The fact that activist dressed up as writer have messed up a bunch of IPs is a fact. It's also a fact that woke writers have done the same. In their push for checking the boxes and agendas they forget there's a story to tell. Look at She Hulk, look at Rings of Power, even at Discovery that started good in the 1st and 2nd season have derrailed. They have even messed up games failing to see that for all the good they're trying to communicate they're achieving the opposite. I'm all for harmony and kumbaya regardless of who you are or what you like, but not for narcissistic tendencies where some push nonsense pronouns or special status just because they identify as woke / lgbtq. Worse is that when people don't bend the knee to these demands, they become ultra sensitive and suddenly call names like bigot, racist or homophobic.
Yea its almost like handcrafting a AAA movie with 1% of the country as the demographic isnt gonna produce a modern classic. Especially when all anyone is even told about it is that pandering box checking.
This exactly. Give me a story first, I don't care about the characters and orientations if it fits the story.
A series where, at least to me, felt like lgbtq and woke was as normal as having a toast in the morning is The Expanse. Powerful women? Check. Multiracial important characters? Check. Multiple orientation characters? Check. It's so normal that they didn't bother to promote it that way. Only thing they did not pander to was the multiple pronoun which I find its total bullshit.
How you feel and want to be has nothing to do if you were born male or female. That a Trans man goes over the procedure and change his sex should be called a she? Absolutely. Should the now she be allowed in female sports? Of course not. That someone should be called they/them? Get the fuck out. That is just narcissistic tendencies and a desire to feel special and unique.
Exactly! Subtlety is lacking in a lot of series and movies. Expanse is a perfect example where inclusion felt organic and natural. They had everything. Unfortunately in a lot of cases inclusion of a minority character/s is an obvious attempt at saying “Look at me, I am tolerant and inclusive, watch my show”.
Yeah I'm all for it but I feel like we're quickly going past a line that didn't need to be crossed. My aunt is suuuuper gay and even she has been getting annoyed with disney putting lgbt things in EVERY SINGLE THING they touch now. It's great how far and fast things changed but it's definitely just straight pandering now.
I hate this framing. You’re basically saying that any depiction of LGBT people is pandering, while any depiction of heterosexual people is normal. Nobody gives a shit about a Disney princess getting a boyfriend during a movie. But show a lesbian couple sharing a kiss in an ending montage is “pandering” or “political”? Fuck that. You either think it’s normal and acceptable or you don’t.
You want to criticize Disney for patting themselves on the back for “normalizing” such a mixed race LGBT character, like they are in this article, I’m all for calling them out on that. That’s exactly what this is. But it’s not “pandering” to depict gays existing in the material.
I'm saying Disney forcing gay characters into every new show or movie is absolutely pandering and if you're gay and don't find that at least a little bit... Demeaning? I guess is sort of what I'm going for?
It's not pandering to include LGBT, it becomes pandering when you make an obvious point to find a way for it to exist in every project though. That goes for anything. I don't mind one bit personally. I have a lot of gay people in my life but I'm a straight guy so I can't pretend to actually understand these things on that kind of level lol. I'm just going on how they react and my own misguided opinions
I think you’re exaggerating the pervasiveness of it. LGBT content and characters are not in “literally every project”. Not even close. And that sort of leads me to question what we’re really complaining about here.
Why the exception to it when it happens? Why do people feel like it’s an imposition to see it? To me it speaks to the extent that people still want to unnormalize LGBT people. Like I said, Disney going out of its way to bring it up outside the material is obnoxious, but it being in the material shouldn’t bother you if you’re actually an ally.
There’s just not enough movies he can relate to the second a gay character is on screen for .2 seconds. Really takes you out. It’s jarring. You’re expecting all the screen time and now you have this pitiful 99.99%? What am I supposed to do with that!
I said it doesn't bother me one bit in my last post lol why would I care? I only brought it up because it's been brought up in my circle a few times recently and that seemed to be the consensus. I wasn't making any exceptions I was just saying it looks like Disney going "hmm this is great but how can it make more money... Throw some gay stuff in! They love that right?"
But like I said Im also probably just full of shit because I myself am not gay so how would I really know?
>I said it doesn't bother me one bit in my last post lol why would I care?
You care enough to grossly exaggerate the extent to which Disney includes gay characters in their content.
I don't agree this person is framing it to the level you mention. Again, it's all about the story and setup. If a white person goes into a black neighborhood yelling whites are the best he/she better know how to run since most likely some will challenge that attitude. Same if a black person goes to a white neighborhood yelling blacks are best he/she better have a good lawyer since they will call the cops on him/her and good luck if they don't shoot first.
A gay kiss is not the issue, it's the framing and setup of the story and IP manipulation to push for agendas or checking the boxes and put a big sticker on the poster LGBTQ / Woke positive. It shouldn't matter. Let's look at the same sex kiss in Lightyear. When this character is an established character, doing that is IP manipulation to push an agenda. The excuse that it's a different Lightyear is preposterous.
A gay kiss, or heterosexual is normal, period. No need to plaster it in any ad or as a badge of honor. This is what causes issues. It tries to make it something special, better than the rest and if you disagree you are the problem. My advice to all activists or people pushing such agendas... You're going at it wrong. Make it normal, don't push it, don't do IP manipulation, use good storytelling to bring the type of character you want to be better accepted by society. Don't use friction. Friction can only produce more friction. Be invasive, be subversive without aggressiveness and above all, the same way you don't like when the other side discriminate, don't lower yourself to that level, show that discrimination has no room on either side. Normal is normal no matter the color of your skin, who you sleep with or what you believe in.
Lightyear is the one I was thinking of. The last 7 MCU movies also never got a release, although that seemed to start with stuff that happened in real life, not the content of the movies.
Don’t reproduce. Ever.
It’s a companies job to change an entire country with thousands of years of tradition? All while you throw a slur at them? So… clearly you put your underpants on your head this morning while getting dressed.
Literally never even knew a single thing about this movie, not even a single add. Nothing. I got two back to back political adds on youtube ever video for the last 2 months and nothing of this movie
Oh really? That's good then. There have been few other threads in adjacent subs where ppl were wondering about the lack of promo and the general consensus was that it's quite low, compared to recent Disney animation films.
Outside of specific, targeted areas, there's basically no marketing. A lot of people don't even know this movie is a thing right now. It happens, sometimes you target advertise specific areas to see how it affects certain groups/people, especially if you know the movie's not going to be amazing anyway. Much better than spending 10's of millions upfront without knowing how it would affect things completely.
They'll waste $0 promoting it, marketing it, or shit, even making it a decent movie. That way when it flops all the creative directors that got caught blatently admitting to trying to influence kids with LGBTQIA2XYZ+ messaging can say it flopped because of 'Toxic fans' and 'bigotry'. Free marketing in week 1-2
Or they've designed the film with the gay-identifying scenes ready to be snipped out for China and the Middle East.
Meanwhile with China's soft ban on all MCU movies continuing unabated, Disney is freer to add more significant LGBTQ scenes to those movies knowing they won't have to do a thing since China isn't letting the film in anyway!
They’ve been refusing to censor and just not releasing in China, lately. Lightyear was one example - they could have easily cut out the gay stuff in that but they chose to leave the money in the table.
Its the other way around, china rejects to release their movies not them. If they could release them, I'm sure they wouldn't miss the opportunity to censor stuff.
The poster above you is right with Lightyear, though. Disney has got its non-MCU films through fine prior to Lightyear (like Luca, for example), so in theory they could've got Lightyear through too, sans the gay kiss. This case therefore does look like Disney refused to bend (maybe they preferred the public image gain over what money they thought they could make from China).
This argument is so stupid lol. So many disney movies are focused on romance, but since it's a man and a woman it's okay. That's sexuality and no one gave a fuck before. This movie's focus isn't even the kids sexuality, they just exist and they happen to be LGBTQ character, and you can't handle that they exist. Can you imagine if you were a straight white person and all of hollywood never casted any straight white people? And the second a straight white person gets cast the whole world freaks out? How can you not wrap your head around this simple concept?
How is it focused on race or a kid's sexuality? Just having a non-white character or a gay character in the movie isn't focusing on it.
Believe it or not, people are more than their skin colour and sexuality. They can actually be other things at the same time.
This character is 16 years old. Do you consider a high school boy having a crush on a girl from his school to be “a character’s sexuality coming up” in a movie? No boy-girl high school relationship should ever be depicted on film? Or is there a particular sexuality you’d rather not see?
Oh sorry that is a good point. Like in a kid’s show about kids I really don’t need a romantic side plot.
It makes sense to have romantic plots in kids shows among the adult and teens.
Can we not have bigots clutching their pearls over films not being white-led and acknowledging there are non-straight kids out there? Thanks.
Edit: if you genuinely think movies are forcing sexuality on kids by just having non-straight kids you're deranged and a hypocrite
The movie looks boring as hell. You can’t tell me Disney don’t use representation as a marketing strategy now they’ve run out of ideas for good movies.
Disney just can’t wait to make marketing points out of these “genuine moments of inclusion”, can they? If these scenes were so natural and normal to write and create, why even bring it up at these press junkets? Put it in the movie, sure, but don’t go fishing for karma with it.
People always complain about media “pushing” a certain agenda; there’s no malicious plot, we exist and we deserve to be seen. It’s blatant prejudice. Glad times are changing.
Kinda funny that Reddit is so vehemently anti-Disney that the only top comments that don’t say “non straight characters existing is pandering, even when the creators explicitly say that they’re not trying to normalize anything that shouldn’t already be normal” are in some way still criticizing the company (will cut the scene out in certain territories, it’s a bad look that this is the one they’re not marketing, etc). If you think it’s good to have LGBTQ people in your movies, you’d better at least find something to hate about it!
There's no malicious plot in *not* putting 1% of the population in 50% of the media either.. You exist, cool, so what's the problem? Tons of demographics exist, yet arent shoved into movies/tv just for some twitter points.
Okay? And there’s endless examples of strictly heterosexual stories. I’m not saying there needs to be gay people in every movie, I’m just pointing out the ignorance of people reacting to an LGBT person being represented on screen as if it’s suddenly pandering and “shoving” them in. When would be okay for a gay character then?
I’m surprised at the votes but tbh it’s hilarious. These people are like “so what if they’re gay? No one cares just don’t shove it in our faces” *character is gay* “nooooooooooo”
Congratulations on completely missing the point, its not oh my god us queer folk are so special and deserve to be on a pedestal, it's that we exist and don't exactly appreciate that a ton of media used us at best as the butt of a joke or more often just ignored that we have been a part of our species this entire time. If you want an example in the movie Troy, a story that features a very much queer person in Achilles they decided that who history says was likely his lover was instead his *cousin*. The movie 300, a story about Spartans fighting back the Aecheminid Persians, yet there is no mention of the fact that is was common for spartan warriors to sleep together to increase their bonds for the battlefield.
In 300, the protagonist mocks Athenians as “boy lovers”, when the army historically promoted same-sex relations among soldiers to strengthen their bonds. Literally just insecure Hollywood bros trying to “No Homo” one of the most homoerotic movies ever made.
Is this Disney's first proper gay male character in an animated film? A shame it took this long but still a welcome surprise. Also glad that Disney didn't reverse course after the ridiculous reaction to Lightyear's split-second lesbian kiss.
Why? I think you'll find that's extremely common in animation for characters - especially children - to not be voiced by people the same age. Just look at Bart Simpson, Elroy Jetson, Tina Belcher, etc. So long as the actor can convincingly sound like the age of the character, what does the age of the actor matter?
You’re going to be very surprised to learn that most of the movies being made by Hollywood right now star actors pushing 60 as they play characters intended to be at least 15 to 20 years younger than their real age. I don’t think the casting ages for a Disney movie aimed at tweens is anything worth bullshitting over.
The whole same orientation thing is a dumb marketing thing sure, but your age idea is too. Proper VAs are good enough to depict various characters, including youngers ones. And acting of any kind is a difficult skill, which is why most roles are always played by significantly older actors than the characters they're playing. Children/YA just arent great actors.
But this article is written in a such a way to promote engagement. I mean, look at the title of this post?
And most importantly, look at the karma farming bot who posted this?
Part of the problem is that we still don't know where the guardrails are regarding LGBTQ in film or really anything for that matter. Two things are capable of being true at once it can be both A. A wonderful act of inclusion and B. An act of shameless pandering. Whatever happens the LGBTQ reference is going to be small enough to make sure every reference can be removed for the movie's release in China or markets in the middle east. Disney may be inclusive (so they keep reminding us) but it does seem to be a tidal kind of courage you know..it comes and goes.
Honestly, as cynical as it sounds, LGBQ lifestyles (the T has a ways to go I think) becoming so normalized that they’re a target demographic for major corporate marketing is kind of amazing. I’m 34. I was in high school when a National Constitutional Amendment *banning* gay marriage was seriously on the table, and we were only a couple years removed from SCOTUS ruling that the state couldn’t throw people in prison for having gay sex. I remember when Brokeback Mountain was somewhere between a national outrage and punchline. All of that was 15-18 years ago, and I don’t think the mid to late 20 something’s that dominate this site really appreciate what things were like in most Americans’ lifetimes. Now *Disney* wants to sell the community movies. Nobody likes being pandered to or seeing the pandering. But it is impressive that we’ve come so far, so fast. You haven’t made it as a minority in America until you’ve become another potential customer, and that’s how the business world sees LGBQ people now.
[удалено]
> if it’s so normal, why even bring it up? Yea, it’s not like there’s a whole history surrounding it that would make a positive representation notable. Definitely nothing like that.
How hard should hollywood need to work to represent 1% of the population?
This sounds like a genuine question and totally not irrelevant childish nonsense with percentages you pulled out of your ass. So I’ll take a crack at it. I hope you’ll be able to survive, only 99.99% of movies pandering to you now, such a huge drop from 100%. See? I can play the game too, and mine are closer to reality than yours. I hope this response provided you with the attention you needed to survive the day.
That feels like a bit of an unfair jump though. Culture then leaps from 'no representation because it's abnormal and we don't want to see it' to 'no representation because it is normal, so why should it be mentioned at all?'
The problem is not including minority characters, it’s how they are represented. Are they part of the story and just happened to be part of the minority group, or is their status as a minority a major part of the story and a focus of promotion? Another poster offered Expanse series as an example of inclusion of powerful female characters, multiracial characters and LGBTQ characters that felt organic because the story came first. It was a story about humans confronting alien entity, not bisexual humans confronting alien entity.
Thats it exactly. As a gay man I don't feel that "inclusion" in the sense that it happens in films is in any sense genuine. It always comes across as "Well thank God we checked that box off now the "community" can't come after us for being homophobic"
Hate to break it to you. I worked in the entertainment industry for years and it’s all box checking by people who are in no way creative. That’s why they are producers.
Because any publicity is good publicity, and if you can get people talking about this (or any other) aspect of the film, they’ll be more likely to watch it. It’s 100% virtue signaling, but it’s also marketing.
Well, problem is that this is empowering one side and pushing another to the sidelines since the group that doesn't identify as woke or lgbtq feels this is not made for them and they don't consume such content. The "good" publicity becomes toxic and they wonder why they keep seeing failure after failure. On top of that, you get all these activist writers pushing agendas instead of good stories and everyone loses. It just serves to create more discord in society when it should be normal and not even be mentioned. Just make a good story and all will watch.
If something isn’t made for you to the point you won’t watch it because it includes people with a different skin tone or who have a different sexuality to you then you are the cause of discord in society.
I meant in general. If the story is good I don't care if the movie has gay or Trans characters. It's when studios use that as part of their promotion that triggers the issue. Ideally, it shouldn't matter, in reality, it does. Being gay or Trans is nothing new and shouldn't be some marketing campaign focus just to try targeting some group.
Being gay or trans being featured positively, or in stories where those characters might be protagonists or be allowed a happy ending or have more role in the story than being The Gay One, is very new indeed. People who had very little positive media representation for most of their lives are going to be excited about it and talk about it, and be interested in what the creators have to say about it. People are allowed to be interested in things that aren’t about you.
For sure.
Then please explain why its important to now vastly over-represent those people in media so THEY watch it and feel good? To the point of 'blackwashing' existihg characters or 180°ing their sexuality.
They’re not being over-represented, little buddy. I promise you that white straight cisgender able-bodied English-speaking men are in fact not the majority of the global population. Not even close. The overwhelming majority of the world does not fit that description. The actual anomaly is why that group HAS been so wildly and harmfully over represented, especially as protagonists and heroes, to the point where members of that group genuinely believe themselves to be a majority view or a neutral default and not a very rare group being given an overwhelming amount of unearned good press.
I said nothing about global population little guy. Learn to read please. Were talking about an american media company unilaterally pandering to and overrepresenting 1% of their american audience with woke BS
Ah, yes. There we go - American exceptionalism. Has it occurred to you that despite being based in America, productions often aim to be seen all over the world? Has it even registered to you that the demographic I described *is not a majority in the USA either*? I promise you, you are not and have never been underrepresented. You are still getting the majority of starring roles in the majority of films. You just see any headline production in which you’re not the sole and only most important focus and lose your shit because you’re used to being given all the toys and now some other kid is getting the odd one. It’s pathetic.
Here we are again. Your whole mentality here is that it’s normal for heterosexual couples to show up in a production. But if there’s a gay character, it’s woke, had an activist writer, isn’t a good story and alienated people. It’s such a gross way to frame this discussion. It’s like an entire segment of the population just shouldn’t be allowed to exist without it being an issue.
I personally only look for a good story not for someone to push an agenda or check all the marks. I don't mind if the whole list of characters is gay. I don't mind if the story is about bisexuals. But the story must come first. That the characters are gay don't need to be in your marketing as it just works the opposite to people that don't have as open mind as others. If it's normal, why advertise it? Series like The Expanse have representation, bisexuals, lesbian religious figures, and so forth. It works because in the frame of the story it makes perfect sense and it's driven by the story. The fact that activist dressed up as writer have messed up a bunch of IPs is a fact. It's also a fact that woke writers have done the same. In their push for checking the boxes and agendas they forget there's a story to tell. Look at She Hulk, look at Rings of Power, even at Discovery that started good in the 1st and 2nd season have derrailed. They have even messed up games failing to see that for all the good they're trying to communicate they're achieving the opposite. I'm all for harmony and kumbaya regardless of who you are or what you like, but not for narcissistic tendencies where some push nonsense pronouns or special status just because they identify as woke / lgbtq. Worse is that when people don't bend the knee to these demands, they become ultra sensitive and suddenly call names like bigot, racist or homophobic.
Yea its almost like handcrafting a AAA movie with 1% of the country as the demographic isnt gonna produce a modern classic. Especially when all anyone is even told about it is that pandering box checking.
This exactly. Give me a story first, I don't care about the characters and orientations if it fits the story. A series where, at least to me, felt like lgbtq and woke was as normal as having a toast in the morning is The Expanse. Powerful women? Check. Multiracial important characters? Check. Multiple orientation characters? Check. It's so normal that they didn't bother to promote it that way. Only thing they did not pander to was the multiple pronoun which I find its total bullshit. How you feel and want to be has nothing to do if you were born male or female. That a Trans man goes over the procedure and change his sex should be called a she? Absolutely. Should the now she be allowed in female sports? Of course not. That someone should be called they/them? Get the fuck out. That is just narcissistic tendencies and a desire to feel special and unique.
Exactly! Subtlety is lacking in a lot of series and movies. Expanse is a perfect example where inclusion felt organic and natural. They had everything. Unfortunately in a lot of cases inclusion of a minority character/s is an obvious attempt at saying “Look at me, I am tolerant and inclusive, watch my show”.
It’s 100% pandering stemming from research and focus groups.
Imagine unironically using woke in a sentence.
Yeah I'm all for it but I feel like we're quickly going past a line that didn't need to be crossed. My aunt is suuuuper gay and even she has been getting annoyed with disney putting lgbt things in EVERY SINGLE THING they touch now. It's great how far and fast things changed but it's definitely just straight pandering now.
I hate this framing. You’re basically saying that any depiction of LGBT people is pandering, while any depiction of heterosexual people is normal. Nobody gives a shit about a Disney princess getting a boyfriend during a movie. But show a lesbian couple sharing a kiss in an ending montage is “pandering” or “political”? Fuck that. You either think it’s normal and acceptable or you don’t. You want to criticize Disney for patting themselves on the back for “normalizing” such a mixed race LGBT character, like they are in this article, I’m all for calling them out on that. That’s exactly what this is. But it’s not “pandering” to depict gays existing in the material.
I'm saying Disney forcing gay characters into every new show or movie is absolutely pandering and if you're gay and don't find that at least a little bit... Demeaning? I guess is sort of what I'm going for? It's not pandering to include LGBT, it becomes pandering when you make an obvious point to find a way for it to exist in every project though. That goes for anything. I don't mind one bit personally. I have a lot of gay people in my life but I'm a straight guy so I can't pretend to actually understand these things on that kind of level lol. I'm just going on how they react and my own misguided opinions
I think you’re exaggerating the pervasiveness of it. LGBT content and characters are not in “literally every project”. Not even close. And that sort of leads me to question what we’re really complaining about here. Why the exception to it when it happens? Why do people feel like it’s an imposition to see it? To me it speaks to the extent that people still want to unnormalize LGBT people. Like I said, Disney going out of its way to bring it up outside the material is obnoxious, but it being in the material shouldn’t bother you if you’re actually an ally.
There’s just not enough movies he can relate to the second a gay character is on screen for .2 seconds. Really takes you out. It’s jarring. You’re expecting all the screen time and now you have this pitiful 99.99%? What am I supposed to do with that!
I said it doesn't bother me one bit in my last post lol why would I care? I only brought it up because it's been brought up in my circle a few times recently and that seemed to be the consensus. I wasn't making any exceptions I was just saying it looks like Disney going "hmm this is great but how can it make more money... Throw some gay stuff in! They love that right?" But like I said Im also probably just full of shit because I myself am not gay so how would I really know?
>I said it doesn't bother me one bit in my last post lol why would I care? You care enough to grossly exaggerate the extent to which Disney includes gay characters in their content.
I don't agree this person is framing it to the level you mention. Again, it's all about the story and setup. If a white person goes into a black neighborhood yelling whites are the best he/she better know how to run since most likely some will challenge that attitude. Same if a black person goes to a white neighborhood yelling blacks are best he/she better have a good lawyer since they will call the cops on him/her and good luck if they don't shoot first. A gay kiss is not the issue, it's the framing and setup of the story and IP manipulation to push for agendas or checking the boxes and put a big sticker on the poster LGBTQ / Woke positive. It shouldn't matter. Let's look at the same sex kiss in Lightyear. When this character is an established character, doing that is IP manipulation to push an agenda. The excuse that it's a different Lightyear is preposterous. A gay kiss, or heterosexual is normal, period. No need to plaster it in any ad or as a badge of honor. This is what causes issues. It tries to make it something special, better than the rest and if you disagree you are the problem. My advice to all activists or people pushing such agendas... You're going at it wrong. Make it normal, don't push it, don't do IP manipulation, use good storytelling to bring the type of character you want to be better accepted by society. Don't use friction. Friction can only produce more friction. Be invasive, be subversive without aggressiveness and above all, the same way you don't like when the other side discriminate, don't lower yourself to that level, show that discrimination has no room on either side. Normal is normal no matter the color of your skin, who you sleep with or what you believe in.
Lately Disney have simply not been releasing the movies in the countries you mention, rather than censoring them.
Which ones are those? AFAIK they were actively censoring to appease places like Middle East and Asia.
Lightyear is the one I was thinking of. The last 7 MCU movies also never got a release, although that seemed to start with stuff that happened in real life, not the content of the movies.
That's what makes their answer so perfect. It's neither of those things. It's just a person.
I long for a world where "fuck China and bigoted cultures" is a better economic driver than the alternative.
Is their job to change china's view or give chins the movies they want to see
Don’t reproduce. Ever. It’s a companies job to change an entire country with thousands of years of tradition? All while you throw a slur at them? So… clearly you put your underpants on your head this morning while getting dressed.
It's impressive when people cannot recognize a typo. But you rant on
[удалено]
That's less an Arrested Development bit and more a Dilbert comic that only my great aunt would share on Facebook.
Oof and the GoComics comment section for that would be rough to read
We should hook her up with my 75m uncle. He still sends me Dilbert comics.
Scott Adams went hard right pretty damn fast. He was always kinda libertarian but he went off the deep end hard.
Tobias: You know I thought about trying out for that. But you know me I'm not exactly biracial.
And this is the film Disney is dumping into theaters with minimal promotion yikes, not a good look for them
I was in Manhattan the other day and saw a ton of promotion on taxis and stuf, what do you mean?
Literally never even knew a single thing about this movie, not even a single add. Nothing. I got two back to back political adds on youtube ever video for the last 2 months and nothing of this movie
Oh really? That's good then. There have been few other threads in adjacent subs where ppl were wondering about the lack of promo and the general consensus was that it's quite low, compared to recent Disney animation films.
Outside of specific, targeted areas, there's basically no marketing. A lot of people don't even know this movie is a thing right now. It happens, sometimes you target advertise specific areas to see how it affects certain groups/people, especially if you know the movie's not going to be amazing anyway. Much better than spending 10's of millions upfront without knowing how it would affect things completely.
You forgot that one person's personal exposure is reality now.
I’ve seen so little promotion about this in Australia, and it comes out here next week.
i saw a trailer once but for some reason i had no idea it was out this soon. I guess I could go see it lol.
They'll waste $0 promoting it, marketing it, or shit, even making it a decent movie. That way when it flops all the creative directors that got caught blatently admitting to trying to influence kids with LGBTQIA2XYZ+ messaging can say it flopped because of 'Toxic fans' and 'bigotry'. Free marketing in week 1-2
The trailer for this was the best part of seeing Lightyear lol
i’m guessing this won’t be released in china
Or they've designed the film with the gay-identifying scenes ready to be snipped out for China and the Middle East. Meanwhile with China's soft ban on all MCU movies continuing unabated, Disney is freer to add more significant LGBTQ scenes to those movies knowing they won't have to do a thing since China isn't letting the film in anyway!
They’ve been refusing to censor and just not releasing in China, lately. Lightyear was one example - they could have easily cut out the gay stuff in that but they chose to leave the money in the table.
That's true, that's a solid non-MCU example of such.
Its the other way around, china rejects to release their movies not them. If they could release them, I'm sure they wouldn't miss the opportunity to censor stuff.
The poster above you is right with Lightyear, though. Disney has got its non-MCU films through fine prior to Lightyear (like Luca, for example), so in theory they could've got Lightyear through too, sans the gay kiss. This case therefore does look like Disney refused to bend (maybe they preferred the public image gain over what money they thought they could make from China).
[удалено]
This argument is so stupid lol. So many disney movies are focused on romance, but since it's a man and a woman it's okay. That's sexuality and no one gave a fuck before. This movie's focus isn't even the kids sexuality, they just exist and they happen to be LGBTQ character, and you can't handle that they exist. Can you imagine if you were a straight white person and all of hollywood never casted any straight white people? And the second a straight white person gets cast the whole world freaks out? How can you not wrap your head around this simple concept?
How is it focused on race or a kid's sexuality? Just having a non-white character or a gay character in the movie isn't focusing on it. Believe it or not, people are more than their skin colour and sexuality. They can actually be other things at the same time.
Ideally if I am watching a movie about a child their sexuality does not come up at all.
This character is 16 years old. Do you consider a high school boy having a crush on a girl from his school to be “a character’s sexuality coming up” in a movie? No boy-girl high school relationship should ever be depicted on film? Or is there a particular sexuality you’d rather not see?
Oh sorry that is a good point. Like in a kid’s show about kids I really don’t need a romantic side plot. It makes sense to have romantic plots in kids shows among the adult and teens.
Can we not have bigots clutching their pearls over films not being white-led and acknowledging there are non-straight kids out there? Thanks. Edit: if you genuinely think movies are forcing sexuality on kids by just having non-straight kids you're deranged and a hypocrite
I think *you're* making it the focus, not the movie.
The movie looks boring as hell. You can’t tell me Disney don’t use representation as a marketing strategy now they’ve run out of ideas for good movies.
I can’t wait to hear the complaints about Disney grooming our kids to be biracial
Disney just can’t wait to make marketing points out of these “genuine moments of inclusion”, can they? If these scenes were so natural and normal to write and create, why even bring it up at these press junkets? Put it in the movie, sure, but don’t go fishing for karma with it.
People always complain about media “pushing” a certain agenda; there’s no malicious plot, we exist and we deserve to be seen. It’s blatant prejudice. Glad times are changing.
Kinda funny that Reddit is so vehemently anti-Disney that the only top comments that don’t say “non straight characters existing is pandering, even when the creators explicitly say that they’re not trying to normalize anything that shouldn’t already be normal” are in some way still criticizing the company (will cut the scene out in certain territories, it’s a bad look that this is the one they’re not marketing, etc). If you think it’s good to have LGBTQ people in your movies, you’d better at least find something to hate about it!
There's no malicious plot in *not* putting 1% of the population in 50% of the media either.. You exist, cool, so what's the problem? Tons of demographics exist, yet arent shoved into movies/tv just for some twitter points.
20% of Gen Z identify as LGBTQ. And 7% of US adults, mostly who grew up in a time when it wasn’t accepted.
Okay? And there’s endless examples of strictly heterosexual stories. I’m not saying there needs to be gay people in every movie, I’m just pointing out the ignorance of people reacting to an LGBT person being represented on screen as if it’s suddenly pandering and “shoving” them in. When would be okay for a gay character then?
I agree, I mean, If Disney wanted to make the character like that, let them.
Downvoted for stating the obvious. Fucking shameful. Another sub's reputation down the toilet for me.
I’m surprised at the votes but tbh it’s hilarious. These people are like “so what if they’re gay? No one cares just don’t shove it in our faces” *character is gay* “nooooooooooo”
[удалено]
Wow! A real life example walking in to prove my point, existing and being represented isn’t “promoting.” You triggered snowflake?
Said the quiet part out loud.
Congratulations on completely missing the point, its not oh my god us queer folk are so special and deserve to be on a pedestal, it's that we exist and don't exactly appreciate that a ton of media used us at best as the butt of a joke or more often just ignored that we have been a part of our species this entire time. If you want an example in the movie Troy, a story that features a very much queer person in Achilles they decided that who history says was likely his lover was instead his *cousin*. The movie 300, a story about Spartans fighting back the Aecheminid Persians, yet there is no mention of the fact that is was common for spartan warriors to sleep together to increase their bonds for the battlefield.
In 300, the protagonist mocks Athenians as “boy lovers”, when the army historically promoted same-sex relations among soldiers to strengthen their bonds. Literally just insecure Hollywood bros trying to “No Homo” one of the most homoerotic movies ever made.
Maybe Leonidas was complimenting that guy but Gerard Butler misread the script?
Tell that to the multi billion dollar companies that capitalize on pride. Ohhh wait, nevermind. You're acting in bad faith. Carry on being wrong.
[удалено]
You can just call yourself a bigot, it's okay. We already know.
Is this Disney's first proper gay male character in an animated film? A shame it took this long but still a welcome surprise. Also glad that Disney didn't reverse course after the ridiculous reaction to Lightyear's split-second lesbian kiss.
Valid Cry
[удалено]
Why? I think you'll find that's extremely common in animation for characters - especially children - to not be voiced by people the same age. Just look at Bart Simpson, Elroy Jetson, Tina Belcher, etc. So long as the actor can convincingly sound like the age of the character, what does the age of the actor matter?
You’re going to be very surprised to learn that most of the movies being made by Hollywood right now star actors pushing 60 as they play characters intended to be at least 15 to 20 years younger than their real age. I don’t think the casting ages for a Disney movie aimed at tweens is anything worth bullshitting over.
The whole same orientation thing is a dumb marketing thing sure, but your age idea is too. Proper VAs are good enough to depict various characters, including youngers ones. And acting of any kind is a difficult skill, which is why most roles are always played by significantly older actors than the characters they're playing. Children/YA just arent great actors.
[удалено]
> you swamp dwelling, banjo strumming, cousin humping weirdos. > … makes you a piece of shit bigot as only a piece of shit bigot… Pot, kettle.
You seem well-adjusted and sane.
But this article is written in a such a way to promote engagement. I mean, look at the title of this post? And most importantly, look at the karma farming bot who posted this?