Topic: Other Unpopular Opinions (non-gaming tech/media)

@Santa: Why would they extend it if they still make use of them? And I don't understand how exactly is that a bad move unless they are someone like Time Warner who don't make use of Hannah-Barbera IP's because Disney does make use of their IP frequently.

Also, aren't public domains suppose to last like upto 70 years or something?

So yay, Disney are great instead then?

Indiana Jones>Star Wars, lets face it Luke is boring as a character and Indy rocks!

@arronishere: Its for that reason that I thought that they are evil.....ten again, its impossible for them to go bankrupt so they are evil for that I guess.

And yeah, I agree. Indiana Jones>>>>>Starwars.

That is the weirdest definition of evil I've ever seen.

@arronishere: Its not when you consider them doing things that no one wants them to do and yet somehow, they make a lot of money because of that.

@arronishere: Sure there is. Which is why it ruins every single motivation for the industry to be any more creative than they were back then. No motivation to push limits, no taking risks unlike in the past......literally, the animation industry wants to play it safe.

Just look at the oversaturation of 3D Graphics.....really, is 3D the only thing that we want from movies these days?

@arronishere: You don't see the creators wanting to express their form of art in hand drawn only to be forced by community managers to push them to producing it in 3D? its funny how Disney films have 2D animation for the credits which most of the time, should have been the main thing for the movies (Wreck it ralph used beautiful pixel art in the credits.....yet the film didn't make much use of it).

Also, who are you to say that people want 3D? Many creations that were once 2D are horrible when in 3D like Garfield for example. 3D is evil in the sense that whatever style of art the creators wish to create, they are forced to use 3D graphics to make it sell which ruins the feel of the art.

Atleast Gendy managed to give that 2D animation feel in 3D (Hotel Translevania.....even though the film itself isn't that great.)

Why are you even looking for art in family entertainment products? If you want to see someone express themselves through animation then try indie films and even then Frozen, Big Hero 6 etc do a great job of expression.

3D animations are highly successfull and popular so yes it is wanted, the last 2D film they produced (Winnie the Pooh) in 2011 fail to reach 50m which is shockingly poor for a major kids film, for comparison Big Hero 6-657m, Frozen-1.3b and Wreck It Ralph-470m.

Garfield isn't a Disney film.

Instead of saying Disney are evil try saying instead "I'm disappointed Disney don't make that many 2D cartoons anymore". Of course you just could talk about how they use child labour to make tacky merch is evil however based on you moans before, entrainment media is more important than the blight of real people to you so I doubt it occurred to you or would even be sincere.

@arronishere: I then made an apology about the stupid post I did for Africa then didn't I? And if I said they were evil, why would you defend them for that. Its only if these companies that go bankrupt, then those kids will be free wouldn't they?

3D successful.....Really? Then explain the flop of the Good Dinosaur, Cars, Planes (did well but its still horrible), and the list can go on. 2D not being successful as 3D doesn't mean that 3D prints money. Certain films express better in 2D unlike 3D where the slapstick is expressed more often than other expressions.

Tangled expresses slapstick more often than Aladdin. Its like every character in 3D needs that slapstick gag in them to compensate the art style.

Its honestly oversaturated. I'm glad that Comics will never have rendered 3D art instead of traditional art.

I don't get all the discussion here. The guy is long dead, so unless there are some zombie ressurection shenanigans involved, I don't know why he's evul goy.

@arronishere: Umm.....it kind of is because either way, they need money to survive. Forced to do work to get payed. What's your point?

Again...you can say the very same for successful 2D films. Good Dinosaur and Cars weren't that successful weren't they?

Kinda late to the party but Disney has made many movies based on old fairy tales. Hell, Frozen original fairy tale is pretty dark. Also I hate Disney and how it has basically monopolized American pop cultural as a whole.

@arronishere: Still doesn't mean that they are successful or good movies now does it?

Well pretty much anything I say to you is stupid even if my opinions are just being opinions.

Yet they also have profit margins right? Also, big numbers don't mean success.

The Good Dinosaur has made a profit of $44.6 million at the box office. Cars has made a profit of $342 million at the box office. Cars 2, $359.9. Planes, $189.3.

I think that is a success.

@Aviator: But are those movies any good? Nope. Also, you think its success but that's your opinion. These days, movies need to make lots of money to survive and for Disney, that amount will obviously be a disappointment for them.

Disney have made and are still making good movies. The last 4 Disney theatrical classics are all good movies. Sure they've made some movies that aren't good, but that doesn't make the company evil. Making bad movies is not evil. Making good movies is not good. Good and evil aren't determined by the quality of art.

@Socar: Whether the Cars franchise is good or not, it can be considered a success because of the sheer amount of merchandise it's sold.

I liked it more than Begins. Better baddie.

Excluding The Good Dinosaur (which has been out for less than 2 months), all of the movies listed made at least double than the what it cost to produce them.

If you're gonna call that a disappointment, then you need some clarification on that.