Dose Our Generation Have a Nostalgia Gatekeeping Problem?

[Endus]

Does positive review "brigading" happen?

From what I've seen there's maybe some "counter-brigading" that happens, but I haven't seen any examples of massive spams of unwarranted 5-star audience reviews. I'm not saying it can't or doesn't happen, I've just never seen it happen or seen anyone talk about it.

There's no reason it couldn't. But I wouldn't say it does happen without evidence.

[segara82]

If you're only looking at the films, maybe, but Disney makes money off everything Star Wars.

And those films were financially successful. The only one you could even really call a box office disappointment was Solo. The rest more than made back their production costs, and topped a billion worldwide revenue each.

https://observer.com/2020/08/star-wa...ey-box-office/

Birds of Prey was better than it had any reason to be, though it didn't have much of an audience and marketing fucked it up pretty royally. And GB 2016 was just a generically meh film; it's only considered a travesty because of comparisons to the original. I've never defended it as a "good movie", just as "not complete garbage trash but more like a 6/10".



No, this is desperate flailing in an attempt to manufacture excuses.

Star Wars has, even with the added revenue of toys, games, and books not recouperated the initial investment. While individual films have been financially successful and recouped their own investment, they have alienated so many fans they killed the merch sale. All in all, SW for Disney is so far an investment that has after 9 years and several movies failed to turn a real profit after factoring in the purchasing price. Is a financial loss after that much work really what you would call a success? I don't.

Birds of Prey barely made 200 millions, barely breaking even. Barely. You call that a success? Well, of course you would, since you consider Disney's Star Wars run a success too.

So, even you admit that GB2016 bombed and is not a success?

And for Captain Marvel: It is not a 'desperate flailing in an attempt to manufacture excuses'. IF CM were as good and beloved as you and others claim ... why are the DVD/BR not selling? Surely the fans would buy them if it were that good, right?
Oh, they don't? Well .... my point stands.

Given that I'm not, no.

But you are, you are just to stubborn to admit it.

[Endus]

Star Wars has, even with the added revenue of toys, games, and books not recouperated the initial investment. While individual films have been financially successful and recouped their own investment, they have alienated so many fans they killed the merch sale. All in all, SW for Disney is so far an investment that has after 9 years and several movies failed to turn a real profit after factoring in the purchasing price. Is a financial loss after that much work really what you would call a success? I don't.

I note you have no source whatsoever for this claim.

Also, ROI has a time frame. And you have no source to justify the belief that the Star Wars aquisition has failed to perform to Disney's expectations regarding that ROI.

Birds of Prey barely made 200 millions, barely breaking even. Barely. You call that a success? Well, of course you would, since you consider Disney's Star Wars run a success too.

Where did I say Birds of Prey was successful? I said it was better than people thought and marketing for it was awful.

So, even you admit that GB2016 bombed and is not a success?

Yes. Did you think that's some kind of gotcha?

I thought I talked about it on here back when it came out, but I can't pull up any posts at all, so apparently that was on another forum. I never thought the GB reboot was "good". I thought it was a 6/10, maybe 7/10. I thought it had deviations from the original that were indefensible, like the shift to "killing" ghosts rather than "capturing". But those issues had nothing to do with the actresses in the film, or that the cast was female in general. You could tell that any potential soul it might've had was ground out in focus groups and corporate meetings. Did you expect me to say it was the bestest thing ever, or something? I just disagree with people saying it was 1/10 garbage. I've seen movies that were legitimately that bad. If you want to know if I'd prefer to watch a Twilight movie, or GB2016, I'll throw on the latter. "Generically meh" is a death knell when you're rebooting a classic.

And for Captain Marvel: It is not a 'desperate flailing in an attempt to manufacture excuses'. IF CM were as good and beloved as you and others claim ... why are the DVD/BR not selling? Surely the fans would buy them if it were that good, right?
Oh, they don't? Well .... my point stands.

In what world are DVD and Blu-Ray sales a big marker of anything when nearly everyone has HD streaming at their fingertips?

I don't own a BR copy of Captain Marvel. I don't own a BR copy of anything from the last, like, 6 or 7 years. Not because there weren't fantastic films in that time, but because I've had access to streaming services. Which often bump up quality. I have a lot of films on DVD I never watch because DVD isn't 4k. For instance. I still watch those films. Just not from the DVDs I own.

Plus, let's compare. Here's Captain Marvel's figures;
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Ca...9)#tab=summary

To be as even as possible, here's Spider-Man: Far From Home's figures; it made pretty comparable box office results and at close to the same time frame;
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Sp...9)#tab=summary

Disc sales are too close to see any meaningful difference. So to your claim; it's bunk. You're operating from a false premise.

Which is why you keep saying things, without sourcing them in actual data.

[Kevyne-Shandris]

Starting with the baby boomer generation, parents started abandoned their kids to grow up in daycares and public schools (read: prisons), come home and find no parents in the house. What do the kids do? They turn to each other and get sucked into the pop cult, being raised by TV. They become consumers who want toys and merch of the franchise they worship. And then their parents shuffled them into college. So by the time a man is 25 years old, he has spent his entire life having no responsibility, having no good role models, and being a partyier. Hence why you have 40 year old manbabies who still live with their parents and spend all of their money on Star Wars merch.

Oh, it started even earlier than that with parents, going back to pre-history even.

It wasn't until the Baby Boomer generation that kids were even SEEN (Victorian society believed children should ONLY be seen and not heard). My parents were of that mindset, and I'm early GenX generationally, but my parents weren't Boomers, they were born during the Silent Generation (Before WWII).

So independence was taught VERY early in my family (kids today are in diapers still in kindergarten! My parents "social network" were like if you weren't potty trained by 2 years-old you had bad parents! Remember my grandmother was irate that a neighbor's kid at 4 was still in diapers in the 1980s).

You had to learn to "tank" the world alone. Not what they teach today to always be "social" and do what the GROUP does for security. If you couldn't stand on principle through fire and fury, you couldn't cut the mustard and a washout.

Early GenX and being home alone, was par on course, even when my parents were kids. Siblings became "little mom" or "little dad", instead. My dad had to watch his younger brother as he was ill (needed major surgery and was weak for years afterwards), as boys were just mean. Same with my big sis, who takes care of me today. As I had to take care of my mom, living in a foreign land and all.

Each generation likes to see their generation as the more "sane" one, but they all had their faults. GenX and money? OMG! No one told us anything about finances. Look at Mike Morhaime funding Blizzard and meeting payroll on his credit card (with money donated by his grandma!). Good God!

[Stormcall]

No, this is desperate flailing in an attempt to manufacture excuses.

No, it isn't. What he said is true. Captain Marvel came right in between the 2 biggest, most epic in scope Marvel movies to date, the end of an era, and the final(in theory) appearance of several major beloved characters who have been centerpieces of the entire MCU. The movie featured the debut of a character who was being hyped to feature prominently in the second half of that aforementioned biggest, most epic in scope movie to date and who would be a leading MCU character going forward. Are you saying you truly think that had nothing to do with the movie's success, and everyone rushed out to see it because it was a great movie and they just loved Captain Marvel?

As for his point about DVD/blu-ray sales, it gets a little more questionable but he's not actually wrong there either. It made ~$67 million in home video sales, which IS among the lower end of the MCU spectrum. It has basically tied Ant-Man and beat Ant-Man 2 and Dr. Strange, but every other MCU film I checked did better. Some beat it by as little as ~$5-6 million(like Ragnarok), while The Avengers beat it by nearly $180 million. I'm not saying $67 million is a failure or a total bomb or anything, and there are other considerations(The Avengers has had 9 years worth of sales to reach that $250 million mark, Captain Marvel has only had 2 years to reach it's $67 million) just that, at least right now, it's not one of their biggest moneymakers when it comes to home video.

[Grax]

It's pretty rare. But the types who get pissed that He-Man isn't in a Masters of the Universe show tend to band together to review bomb the shit without watching any of it. They hear from a trusted source that it's not focused on the big muscle guy so why would they even tune in? It's about a girl? Fuck that! Imagine if we'd had twitter when She-Ra came out.

When She-ra came out, it was the kids that were watching it. Not adults. And the entire reasoning behind She-ra was to capture that 50% of the market they were missing. Let me re-emphasize KIDS.

Why would negative review bombing be more prevalent than positive review. . . um. . . uplifting? What is the criteria for a review bomb?

[Konteil]

Entertainment companies keep repackaging this stuff more so than there is an active desire for it. Mostly because this stuff never goes away anymore.

If I wanted to watch All in the Family or Ed Sullivan back in the day, I had to catch a rerun on some affiliate channel or buy a VHS collection for $29.99 on a late-night infomercial.

But I can bring up like any episode of the Pirates of Dark Water or Bravestar if I wanted in a few seconds. I mean, I don't. A retelling of the classic tale of Silverhawks is what I am clamoring for necessarily. Probably not a lot of other people are either- they just recall it and say, "Oh yea."

But that's enough for an entertainment company because they just need eyeballs on the product on content. Voluminous, unending content.

The whole gatekeeping thing is really just a small amount of nerds. To be frank.

ok where did you find a place to stream pirates of darkwater. that is a show i miss like helland got super pissed when hanna barbara got scrapped and it got cancelled. i need this show lol

[Triceron]

So I'm 39, grew up with all of the 80's properties you talked about, and have the same general indifference to social media.

The Masters of the Universe fiasco to me stems from one thing - Kevin Smith lying to the audience. I think if not for the intentional 'rage bait' statement, no one would really care about this property and it'd be generally ignored or left obscure. This is all news worthy because it's something people can emotionally react to on social media.

I find that rage/cancel culture is emotionally driven, and generally would not even be a symptom of being a fan or having nostalgia. People are growing up around social media, and expressing opinions and emotions publicly has become normalized. People are making money off expressing their emotions on the internet, publicly, at full volume. Social media isn't really the problem itself, and I see it as the enabler for expressing opinions and emotions. No one uses social media for *information and facts*, it's sole purpose is all about generating the feels.

So whenever this kind of news blows up on social media, it's pretty much all reactions and first impressions, regardless of whether something is objectively good or bad. And it really goes either way. Sometimes its good, like getting Sonic changed in the Sonic movie. Sometimes its bad, like cancelling James Gunn for tasteless tweets he made 10 yrs ago. The reactions are always emotion driven, and social media gives those emotions a platform to be expressed publicly. Of course, that all leads to mob mentality and tribalism and all that, and we can see how generally society overall has been influenced by these kind of 'trends'.

I don't think it's a generational thing as much as it is a societal shift. Why is our generation less affected? Because generally we grew up in a world that still kept emotions controlled and conservative, and we did not grow up in a world where expressing emotions on a public platform is considered the norm. We're the last generation of 'emotional conservatives', so to speak.

[Grax]

I've said this in other threads, but this whole He-Man thing is another embarrassing example of the creative bankruptcy of my generation. Since we're incapable of creating anything new, we must take even the cast-off crumbs of 30-plus year-old children's entertainment and present it as something "new". Frankly, I am totally ashamed to be a part of this group.

[Rozz]

It's probably just the nerd/comic book culture that spread into everything else tangentially related (games, shows, animation, etc). It's the same types of people falling in the same circles. Like how reviewer/critic culture started with plays/opera/books and spread into everything from clothing to food.

There is a problem, but it's not tied to our generation per se. More likely just unaddressed issues that are made worse on an anonymous international space.

[Egomaniac]

[QUOTE=segara82;53309441]Disney has not recouped the initial 4 billion dollar investment.

It's a 4 billion dollar investment. You don't make that back overnight...but still:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2691925505/
Force Awakens Box Office: 2 billion

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2708702721/
Last Jedi Box Office: 1.3 Billion

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2557707777/
Rogue One Box Office: 1 Billion

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/...ref_=bo_se_r_1
Rise Of Skywalker Box Office: 1 Billion

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/...ref_=bo_se_r_2
Solo Box Office: 400million

Of all those...Solo is the only one that didn't really make any money for Disney. Plus there's the Mandalorian on D+. And then you gotta consider merchandise, video games, etc. Also, they didn't just get Star Wars. They got Lucasfilm and everything included in that. That means all the IP's. That means Industrial Lights and Magic. You're fucking kidding yourself if you think Disney isn't making bank on Star Wars.

The only reason Captain Marvel made as much money as it did was because they moved the release to just before the long awaited finish because they knew fans were hoping for more infos on Endgame. The bad video sales (DVD+BR) confirm that hypothesis.

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Ca...ab=video-sales
Captain Marvel Video Sales:

Domestic: 67 million

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/An...ab=video-sales
Antman and the Wasp Video sales

Domestic: 50 million

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Do...6)#tab=summary
Doctor Strange Video Sales:

Domestic 58 Million

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Sp...ng#tab=summary
Spider-Man Homecoming Video Sales

Domestic: 70 million

That's Captain Marvel's video sales compared to two other marvel films that it outperformed on video sales and one that it came pretty close to meeting. Not the highest numbers sure...but not "bad" by any means.

[Endus]

Of all those...Solo is the only one that didn't really make any money for Disney. Plus there's the Mandalorian on D+. And then you gotta consider merchandise, video games, etc. Also, they didn't just get Star Wars. They got Lucasfilm and everything included in that. That means all the IP's. That means Industrial Lights and Magic. You're fucking kidding yourself if you think Disney isn't making bank on Star Wars.

Like, do I own any of the sequel trilogy on Blu-Ray? Nope. Not even the films I like. See above comment about streaming; why bother when I have Disney+ in 4k that I can play on basically any platform, not just ones compatible with the discs?

What I do have are multiple big Lego kits, including the Razorcrest, as part of my growing Lego collection. I know Disney's getting some kind of kickback on that merch, some kind of licensing agreement. What percentage? No clue! But it's more than I ever bought during the pre-Disney era.

No, I don't have the big Falcon. That thing's a monster and it's out of my price range right now.

[Egomaniac]

Like, do I own any of the sequel trilogy on Blu-Ray? Nope. Not even the films I like. See above comment about streaming; why bother when I have Disney+ in 4k that I can play on basically any platform, not just ones compatible with the discs?

What I do have are multiple big Lego kits, including the Razorcrest, as part of my growing Lego collection. I know Disney's getting some kind of kickback on that merch, some kind of licensing agreement. What percentage? No clue! But it's more than I ever bought during the pre-Disney era.

No, I don't have the big Falcon. That thing's a monster and it's out of my price range right now.

Also, There's a ton of cross-brand things they can do now. Visual and Audio effects for Disney movies are done by ILM and Skywalker Sound...so essentially they are paying themselves to provide effects for their own movies. Marvel publishes Star Wars Comics now...so they get all that coming in.

Yeah, the very concept that Disney's 4 billion dollar purchase of LucasArts hasn't been paying expected dividends is fucking ludicrous. It's the goddamn Golden Goose.

Reportedly, Disney had made back their investment in 2018...before Rise of Skywalker was even released.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/30/six-...nvestment.html

[Fantomen]

Visual and Audio effects for Disney movies are done by ILM and Skywalker Sound...so essentially they are paying themselves to provide effects for their own movies.

You miss the opportunity cost. Before ILM do special effects for (insert random movie company) and is payed 25 million for the work, and ILM expence are 20 million, thats a proffit of 5 million.

Now ILM do special effectes for a Disney movie, ILM have a budget of 20 million, and have a expence of 20 million, ILM profit is now 0.
The Disney movie is now 5 million cheaper, but ILM have reduced its profit by 5 million, its a zero sum game.

Disney owned ILM do only allow Disney to have better controll (that can led to a more efficient production, hence make it cheaper, but its not granted)

[Egomaniac]

You miss the opportunity cost. Before ILM do special effects for (insert random movie company) and is payed 25 million for the work, and ILM expence are 20 million, thats a proffit of 5 million.

Now ILM do special effectes for a Disney movie, ILM have a budget of 20 million, and have a expence of 20 million, ILM profit is now 0.
The Disney movie is now 5 million cheaper, but ILM have reduced its profit by 5 million, its a zero sum game.

Disney owned ILM do only allow Disney to have better controll (that can led to a more efficient production, hence make it cheaper, but its not granted)

It's not automatically cheaper, no...but the money isn't going into a competitors pockets, either. All the money stays in the House of Mouse.

[Dhrizzle]

Oh dear. You think there weren’t older fans of Saturday morning cartoons? I bet you think only kids read comics back then too.

He-Man and She-Ra were borderline unwatchable on the 80s. Even nostalgia can barely put a shine on those turds.

[Paperfox]

IMHO we're talking about multiple sets of moving goalposts.

1. Movies and books generally reflect the common culture at the time.
2. Humor and drama is always changing.
3. We, the audience, are changing. There are big changes like from a teenager to adult, and from year to year.

Isn't "bad memory" the quick definition of nostalgia?

[Syegfryed]

Did you miss the part where two of her best friends had just died as she discovered they and the rest of the people closest to her had been keeping a massive secret from her? The series does a pretty good job of explaining her statebof mind when she meets with Adam in the champion's paradise.

and she got pissed about the secret, and not about the death of her best friends?

she can't realise the secret was necessary and instead, ignore the deaths and bitch about the secret, like a revolted teen? come on, pretty sure she isn't 18, so this angry teen characterization throw me off hard when i know she is mroe than that.

What?

they had downplay on he-man and prince adam so he don't get the spotlight of her, obviously, cause a lot of people went to the series, expecting and wanting to see he-man, because is what they sold, and what most people want to see, him beating people

I'm guessing you didn't watch the original series much.

Dude, where i live, there was only that to watch, that and thundercats, we didn't get much variety like people in USA

He-Man has a similar problem to Superman, he's too powerful and once he shows up there's pretty much no tension any more because he can just punch or throw rocks at the problem until it stops being a problem. Most of the episodes that have any sort of stakes usually revolve around keeping He-Man out of the action, he's really far away or Adam lost his sword or has to eat a big dinner or something.

He didn't had that problem that much no, he was not "too powerful", but his powers obviously variety on the plot

As a series with a progressive story it makes sense they won't just introduce He-Man early and have him punch Skeletor and throwing rocks for the next 7 episodes.

But no one rly just want that, but right away kill and shit his character, despite the hype and marketing? that was a low blow.

Besides exploring Eternia post-He-man and Skeletor was brilliant. Seeing how the villains scattered and their attitudes to each other was great, especially Tri-Klops and Whiplash blaming magic for their previous issues and making the Cult Mechanicus.

Of course it was good idea, i even said it was a good move, and didn't said the series was all bad.

But, they had three problems i, personally can't ignore. One, you can build something new without the need to be on top of the bones of the old. They didn't had to shit on the main guy to give focus to others, other series did that fine. Two, The characterization of some characters was bad and didn't reflect the original, Teela to me was especially bad acting like an angry teen when i know she is not. Three, the marketing problem, They heavy featured he-man, they hyped him, they said it was his series, but it was bait and switch, if they had said, from the beginning, what it was about, then everyone was going to be more open.

The excuse at the moment is because its just the first part, but if the second part does not focus on he-man/adam, then it will be a big flop for what it was supposed to be, imo.

[Fantomen]

He-Man and She-Ra were borderline unwatchable on the 80s. Even nostalgia can barely put a shine on those turds.

So why make a sequeal to somthing that was a turd?

- - - Updated - - -

All the money stays in the House of Mouse.

You still missing the opportunity cost, imagen you did not buy ILM, and you get the "Lucas packet" 100 million cheaper. You can still hire ILM for your movies, and the total cost in the end for the movie is the same. But you have 100 million you can go and invest in somthing else like goverment bonds and make more money.

[eschatological]

So why make a sequeal to somthing that was a turd?

Nostalgia.

Nostalgia brings the parents in, then they make it new and updated for their kids. In 30 years, they'll think the new version of He-Man which is just the Adam meme with flashing light behind it is dumb for their kids.

IDK, when I was a kid, we made fun of our parents for saying "Back in my day," but in terms of reboots and stuff like that, it seems like all of my generation is stuck with this tired, bored mindset of "it was better back then," which is rarely the case. I loved He-Man, Transformers, etc back in the day (even though as a young immigrant kid even then I couldn't get into the jingoistic G.I. Joe), but they are objectively not good TV, looking back at it now.