Disney and the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week
'Strange World' not taking off, Simu Liu being annoying, and corporate-level drama
Disney (and the people connected to it) has been in the news a lot this past week for various reasons, some good, mostly bad, it really depends on where you stand. I’ll recap below in order of importance:
1. ‘Strange World’ bombs at the box office
In what world are we living in that a Disney animated film would underperform at the box office? (We are, indeed, living in a strange world.) Maybe if this were 20 years ago during Walt Disney Animation Studios’s dark ages (Dinosaur, The Emperor’s New Groove, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Treasure Planet, Home on the Range, Meet the Robinsons) this wouldn’t be surprising, but this is the studio’s new Renaissance Era! Starting with Tangled in 2010, almost every film since then has been both a critical and box office success, making anywhere between $500 million to $1.5 billion! (Raya and the Last Dragon and Encanto are pandemic-related exceptions—Raya was released simultaneously in theatres and streaming, which blunted its box office prospects, while Encanto had the best pandemic-era opening weekend for an animated film.) But the studio’s latest offering, Strange World, a film whose marketing seemed nearly nonexistent (it’s shocking that the film’s trailer wasn’t played before any of my three screenings of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, which Disney owns), is off to a rocky start. The Thanksgiving holiday is usually an important release date for Disney animated films (Frozen, Big Hero 6, Moana, and many others have been released around Thanksgiving), with little-to-no competition, but Strange World made so little in its first two days ($4.2 million this past Wednesday and $2.4 million on Thursday), weekend estimates for the film have now been revised to $26 million (on a $180 million budget). The film was originally expected to debut between $30-$40 million. In comparison, Encanto debuted with $40.3 million over the same weekend last year.
There are several theories that can explain why Strange World didn’t take off:
The people who have seen the movie don’t exactly love it. The reception has been more lukewarm (65/100 on Metacritic and a “B” Cinemascore, which is not great). I saw the film and it… was not good. (My review is coming soon.) And unlike Encanto, which saw much more success after it started streaming on Disney Plus thanks to its catchy tunes, Strange World isn’t a musical, so there’s nothing to help elevate its lacking story.
There’s backlash to one of the film’s gay characters. Homophobic internet users have been review bombing the film, and right-wing political commentators have been attacking Strange World for promoting “the gay agenda.” The film isn’t being released in anti-gay countries, including those from the Middle East, Africa, South Asia, and China. This is all because Ethan Clade, one of the main characters, is openly gay. It’s not even a major plot point, it’s just a character trait. Ethan’s queerness isn’t even mentioned in any of the trailers or ads. I don’t think anti-gay backlash will have anything to do with its box office failure, but right-wingers will still use it as proof that “woke” films are not successful (just like they said about Lightyear earlier this year).
People are expecting it to stream on Disney Plus relatively soon. This will tie into the later part of this newsletter but basically Disney has kinda been destroying their animated films departments’ legacies. Ever since the start of the pandemic, which coincided with Disney’s hiring of its new CEO Bob Chapek, the company has been botching the releases of its animated films both from Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar Animation Studios. With the former studio, it released Raya and the Last Dragon simultaneously in theatres and Disney Plus, then released Encanto exclusively in theatres but alongside the announcement that it would arrive just a month later on Disney Plus in time for Christmas. With Pixar, arguably the company’s more prestigious sister studio, it released three films in a row directly to Disney Plus (Soul, Luca, Turning Red) before finally releasing the Toy Story spinoff Lightyear (easily the worst film of the bunch) in theatres. (Like Strange World, Lightyear also underperformed financially. It started streaming on Disney Plus just two months later.) This confusing mix of release strategies have dampened the expectations of any theatrical release for the company’s animation arm. People now, for good reason, expect Disney animated films to stream on Disney Plus. The company has treated one of its best assets—something the company was founded on—as if they were disposable direct-to-video productions, not industry giants. They prioritized its streaming service over art. It’s shameful.
Karma is a god. Strange World stars Jake Gyllenhaal, one of Taylor Swift’s most famous exes, and her recently-released album Midnights has a song called “Karma,” warning people from her past that they’ll face consequences for doing her wrong. It looks like Karma really is Taylor Swift’s boyfriend.
2. Simu Liu can’t stop making everything about himself
I’ve already written plenty on my issues (and annoyance) with Simu Liu, the Chinese Canadian star of Marvel’s Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings and the Korean Canadian sitcom Kim’s Convenience, so I’ll try not to repeat too much of what I’ve already said. This week, he went on another one of his infamous Twitter rants to call out filmmaking legend Martin Scorsese and less-legendary-more-annoying-but-still-talented Quentin Tarantino for being Hollywood “gate keepers.” Liu tweeted:
“If the only gatekeepers to movie stardom came from Tarantino and Scorsese, I would never have had the opportunity to lead a $400 million plus movie. I am in awe of their filmmaking genius. They are transcendent auteurs. But they don't get to point their nose at me or anyone. No movie studio is or ever will be perfect. But I'm proud to work with one that has made sustained efforts to improve diversity onscreen by creating heroes that empower and inspire people of all communities everywhere. I loved the "Golden Age" too.. but it was white as hell.”
The reason for these tweets? Tarantino’s recent comments he made on the 2 Bears, 1 Cave podcast, in which the filmmaker expressed his opinion that traditional movie stars were declining. He said:
“Part of the Marvel-ization of Hollywood is you have all these actors who have become famous playing these characters. But they’re not movie stars. Right? Captain America is the star. Or Thor is the star. I mean, I’m not the first person to say that. I think that’s been said a zillion times, but it’s like, you know, it’s these franchise characters that become a star.”
And the reason Scorsese was called out by Liu as well is because he’s Marvel Cinematic Universe fans’s boogeyman. Scorsese famously said Marvel movies weren’t “cinema,” and the MCU fans were not having it, with many calling him elitist and, like Liu said, gatekeeping. (Never mind the fact that Scorsese likes Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films, which predates the Marvel Studios that we know today.)
Going back to Liu’s tweets, I’m not even gonna bother talking anymore about the Scorsese aspect of it because he doesn’t actually have anything to do with the topic Liu brings up. Scorsese’s comments were from a couple years ago. Liu is specifically responding to Tarantino’s comment about Hollywood stars. First off, Tarantino didn’t say anything wrong! He’s absolutely right that the characters of Marvel movies are the star, not the actors. Marvel movies are reliable billion dollar-grossing blockbusters, but we rarely ever see the same success when Marvel actors star in other films. With rare exceptions, these actors who became household names for starring as Marvel superheroes are never remembered for any other recognizable role. Tom Cruise is a movie star. Will Smith is a movie star. Sandra Bullock, Denzel Washington, George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, even Adam Sandler, they’re all (or were) movie stars. Chris Evans is not a movie star. Chris Hemsworth is not a movie star. Tom Holland is not a movie star. Brie Larson is not a movie star. Simu Liu, most definitely, is not a movie star. I can guarantee you no one went to see Shang-Chi because it starred “the dude from Kim’s Convenience.” People went to see Shang-Chi because it’s a Marvel Studios film.
Secondly, no one was even talking to Liu! Having one successful film does not a movie star make. But this isn’t the first time Liu misconstrued something to make it about himself. Last year, Disney’s then-CEO Bob Chapek spoke about the strategy of releasing Shang-Chi on Disney Plus just 45 days after its theatrical debut. “We think it’s going to be an interesting experiment,” Chapek said. “The prospect of taking a Marvel title to the service after just 45 days would be an interesting data point.” Shortly afterwards, Liu wrote an impassioned tweet, saying, “We are not an experiment. We are the underdog; the underestimated. We are the ceiling-breakers. We are the celebration of culture and joy that will persevere after an embattled year. We are the surprise. I’m fired the f**k up to make history on September 3rd; JOIN US.”
Again, Liu lost the plot. Chapek was clearly talking about the theatrical-to-streaming release model as the experiment, not that a superhero film with an Asian lead was the experiment. But Liu is clearly and consistently full of himself he can’t help but make this about himself and his oh-so-important movie.
And after many people rightly criticized Liu for his tweets about Tarantino and Scorsese, he tweeted a gif from Shang-Chi, featuring his titular character striking a fight pose, with the words “bracing for loser internet trolls like.” I’m sorry, but calling people who give you legitimate criticism “trolls” is so childish. (This man is 33! Grow the fuck up!)
In the spirit of Simu Liu, I’m going to make this about me :) You can read my review of Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings here.
3. Bob Iger returns as CEO of The Walt Disney Company
One of the most Earth-shattering news to happen in the corporate sector has to be last Sunday’s surprise announcement that Bob Iger would return as CEO of The Walt Disney Company, effective immediately, replacing Bob Chapek, who was only in the role for two years. A corporate shake-up would normally not catch the attention of normal people, but Iger’s return was pretty much universally praised by employees and even fans of the company. Hunter Harris has a pretty good and detailed breakdown of the details in her newsletter (if you’re a paid subscriber), but I’ll do my best to explain the context of it all and why it matters.
Iger was CEO of Disney for 15 years, from 2005 to 2020, and he’s probably the most consequential CEO in the company’s history. During his tenure Iger led the company’s acquisitions of major entertainment companies, including Pixar Animation Studios in 2006 (for $7.4 billion), the studio behind critically and financially successful animated films like Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles; Marvel Entertainment in 2009 (for $4 billion), whose cinematic universe was just taking off (and is now the biggest film franchise of all time); Lucasfilm in 2012 (for $4.06 billion), the company behind Star Wars and Indiana Jones; and 21st Century Fox (for $71.3 billion), including 20th Century Fox, which was one of the Big Six major American film studios (the others include Universal, Paramount, Warner Bros., Sony, and Disney). Under Iger’s leadership, The Walt Disney Company broadened its portfolio of intellectual properties and increased its value from $48 billion to $257 billion.
With his legacy cemented, Iger wanted to go out on a high note and retired in 2020. He handpicked, Bob Chapek, then-chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products, to succeed him as CEO. “I can’t think of a better person to succeed me in this role,” Iger said of Chapek. (It’s worth mentioning both Bobs are white men and even have the same first and middle name, “Robert Allen Iger” and “Robert Alan Chapek”.)
Chapek’s two-year tenure as CEO has not gone smoothly, mostly due to his own damn fault. The list of controversies the company has faced during his time include:
A highly-publicized legal fight with Black Widow star Scarlett Johansson.
The company’s silence amidst Florida’s dangerous and homophobic “Don’t Say Gay” law and Chapek’s eventual response (including the awful notion that Encanto, Black Panther, Shang-Chi, and other properties are more important for diversity and inclusion than “any tweet or lobbying effort”).
Outcry over highly-controversial changes at Disney theme parks, including getting rid of: FastPasses to skip lines, free Magic Bands from theme park resort guests, shuttle services from Orlando International Airport to Walt Disney World hotels, freezing sales of annual passholders and limiting how often they can go to the theme parks, and several price hikes.
And the aforementioned decisions to essentially kneecap the success of the company’s animated films by prioritizing them to streaming.
Iger and Chapek reportedly had a falling out as early as April 2020. Chapek’s reported lack of emotional intelligence, something Iger supposedly excels at, seemed to be one of his biggest flaws. To be fair, as awful as Chapek is, not everything was entirely his fault, specifically when it comes to Disney Plus. Iger was the one who launched the streaming service right before he retired, while Chapek was dealt a bad hand, having the responsibility to grow Disney Plus subscriber numbers (an unprofitable business model) and deal with the Covid-19 Pandemic (which would naturally impact the company’s revenue from theatrical releases and theme parks). But that’s all the sympathy I’m going to give Chapek. (He’s already walking away with a cool $20 million severance package.)
Chapek’s undoing wasn’t any of the many controversies during his tenure. No, the breaking point came in the company’s October earnings call, in which the company reported its streaming business lost $1.5 billion (up from $630 million in last year’s fourth quarter). Despite exceeding expectations and adding 12.1 million new Disney Plus subscribers (for a total of 164.2 million global subscribers), and despite Disney’s 9 percent increase in revenue from the year prior ($20.15 billion for the quarter) and $162 million in profit (up 1 percent compared to last year), the Disney Plus losses was the thing that spooked investors. (Disney shares dropped 12 percent the next morning. Wall Street is so funny that way.) Chapek’s lack of emotional intelligence showed up again during this call, in which he had an “inappropriately sunny,” happy-go-lucky, tone-deaf tone and talked about how great the response to Mickey’s Not So Scary Halloween Party was at Disney World (The New York Times calls the annual holiday event “inconsequential” for the theme park). Disney executives talked amongst each other, lost confidence in Chapek, and decided to fire Chapek after securing Iger’s return.
Iger is the more beloved CEO, and seemingly more competent. But it should also show his lack of judgement for selecting Chapek as his successor to begin with. And while Iger’s leadership has clearly benefitted the company greatly (it feels like everything is owned by Disney nowadays), I can easily argue how all these acquisitions have been bad for the film (and entertainment) industry. But that’s a discussion for another day. Iger’s return is only planned for two years, during which he’ll supposedly help select the next CEO, and his second turn as CEO will hopefully be less controversial than Chapek’s.
I have to add, while Iger may be the more effective CEO compared to Chapek, he’s not the hero everyone is making him out to be. Social activist Abigail Disney, the granddaughter of Roy O. Disney, who co-founded The Walt Disney Company with her great-uncle Walt Disney, recently released a documentary called The American Dream and Other Fairy Tales, which examines American income inequality through the lens of her family’s company. Despite pleading with Iger to give Disney’s theme park employees a living wage (many are homeless or can’t afford basic needs), Iger responded that it’s the government’s responsibility, not Disney’s. (Iger consistently earned between $20 and $40 million per year as Disney’s CEO. In 2018, he earned $66 million.)
Anyway, we’ll see where the company goes from here. There will surely be a couple docuseries or film/tv series about all of this one day. And with where things are headed, with Disney swallowing up one company at a time, it might even be released by Disney itself.