Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 172 posts

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#121

Post by icebraining »

wavefunction wrote: post #85
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because you were (presumably) a kid back then - and everything was much more magical then because it was your whole world and imagination. Just like old people now state how much better the 50s were, because that's when they were children. I pretty much discount anytime someone says "It was better when I was a kid."

There is actually something different with these 80s movies for kids _and_ adults. Part of it was some true courage in the story-telling, for what movie studio of today would allow a character like "Sloth" from the Goonies to end up in a movie? Darkness along with the light. And sincerity in both rather than vapid "sarcasm." These movies have soul and heart. Not saying that similar movie magic is impossible now or in…

What about Gollum?

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#122

Post by isolate »

olewhalehunter wrote: post #116
bitwize wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually psychologists have identified seven basic emotions: fear, anger, joy, sadness, surprise, contempt, and disgust. "Surprise" was considered similar enough to "fear" that Pixar made one character out of them; the same goes for "contempt" and "disgust". Complexity in emotions arises from their interactions, much like how we perceive a spectrum of colors as a mixture of three primaries. Most of the professionals…

Is there any evidence those labels aren't a product of linguistics and culture? Two things developed during childhood that Disney is working to profit from? Did those professionals grow up watching Disney movies?

The labels are based on experiments and are cross-cultural.

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#123

Post by gknoy »

lambda wrote: post #113
tunesmith wrote: post #7

FYI, the first part of the article spoils some minor things about the new star wars film, for those who haven't seen it. I bailed out of reading it after that.

At some point, you have to stop considering any discussion of a movie as spoiler. The term "spoiler" should be reserved for a reveal that actually spoils the movie; where some crucial element of the movies emotional impact can be taken away by knowing some fact in advance that is held secret through the movie. The discussion in the first paragraph here pretty much just covers the exposition in the credits, and the ma…

I think that _the same weekend it opens_ is not in the span that most would consider "spoiler free". If the movie has been out for a month, maybe.

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#124

Post by brazzledazzle »

Alex3917 wrote: post #21
brazzledazzle wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a lot of people are probably going to want to yell at me but I think it needed to be remade. And I say this as a fan. I don't think a non-fan would pour over Star Wars vehicle cross sections. What they did was remake it in the best way possible given their constraints (old diehard fans) and I think it was done smartly and tastefully. Done this way you get new fans without losing a lot of them to appeasing old…

Except for that it wasn't supposed to be a remake, rather this was just a case of everyone involved phoning it in. I think Andrew O'Hehir said it best, "it's the Citibank of movies, literally too big to fail." Right now everyone has been brainwashed into loving it because of Disney's billion-dollar marketing spend. But much like Bush's popularity after 9/11, sooner or later reality is going to catch up. As a kid part…

Well, old die hard fans being who they are for it to work it would require that you not actually tell anyone that you're remaking it.

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#125

Post by 14111411 »

angersock wrote: post #73
fennecfoxen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little self-limiting in the end, at least. The more Disney throws recycled characters in our face as part of a bland franchise-entertainment product, the more compelling real original work will become, and the more likely they are to ruin the childhood magic. I also find hope in recent developments overseas, and anticipate the impact of works such as Puella Magi Madoka Magica on the future of children's televi…

Puella Magi Madoka Magica is most certainly not children's television. ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼

What about bokurano? There are at least 15 children there! It must be good for them!

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#127

Post by mixmastamyk »

Jtsummers wrote: post #61
LukeShu wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre-release materials are the worst, and often contain awful spoilers. I intentionally avoided them for Star Wars. During the previews when I saw Star Wars, one of the people I went with did his best to ignore the Captain America trailer, because he didn't want it spoiled at all. You watch enough ads/pre-release materials to decide you want to see it, then once you decide to see it, you ignore everything you can.

IMO, outside of thrillers or movies that pretty much rely on a major twist, "spoilers" is nonsense. I'm not going to go around telling the plot of a movie to people (that's a dick move), but if a movie cannot stand on its own even if you've been told the last 5 minutes verbatim (or seen them) before seeing the rest, then the movie is probably not worth watching. And there are very few trailers that are that bad. Agai…

Yep, I remember seeing Titanic and obviously knowing how it would end. But strangely enough I forgot about all that once it started and was genuinely surprised when they hit the iceberg. :/

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#128

Post by mixmastamyk »

pen2l wrote: post #88
rayiner wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we weren't raising our kids to be such consumers--turning stupid shit like Star Wars into "cultural experiences"-- Disney wouldn't have any power. They can't own sticks and dirt.

Are we really "raising our kids to be consumers"? I mean, you have to really go out of your way to not make them consumers. I don't even know how it's possible. I recall you have a daughter -- does she not go on and on with the 'let it go' song? When she goes to a store does she not by her own accord beg you to buy her Elsa and Anna themed toys? If not, what are you doing as a parent to not make them consumers? Lots…

I'm not anti-disney really, we let ours watch Mary Poppins and Frozen a few times. But it isn't really hard, you just get rid of the TV (best thing you can do, commercials are a cancer) and focus instead on books and (real) music in the evenings.

The Peanuts Christmas album (vince guaraldi trio) is wonderful this time of year.

Re: Disney is safeguarding its future by buying childhood, piece by piece

#129

Post by andrewingram »

dlp211 wrote: post #68
Alex3917 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for that it wasn't supposed to be a remake, rather this was just a case of everyone involved phoning it in. I think Andrew O'Hehir said it best, "it's the Citibank of movies, literally too big to fail." Right now everyone has been brainwashed into loving it because of Disney's billion-dollar marketing spend. But much like Bush's popularity after 9/11, sooner or later reality is going to catch up. As a kid part…

[STAR WARS: TFA SPOILERS AHEAD] I don't understand how you got to this conclusion. There were more interesting characters and missing backstory in this single movie than in the OT. Characters like Phasma, Maz, the old man that give Poe the map, Poe, Snoke, and the rest of the Knights of Ren. And while there were many parallels between the new movie and the OT, it also introduced and developed a ton of extremely stron…

There's also the fact that entire antagonist team seems desperate to be bigger and badder than what came before (with the possible exception of Snoke who is somewhat mysterious). I took the new super-weapon to be a symptom of this. A healthy number of tropes were both subverted and upheld by the film, a pattern I hope continues.
Post reply on HN