#criticism of Walt Disney co

[twopoppies]

"not that i can afford pleasing but disney is literally on the boycott list"

I don't care one way or another for pleasing either but please can we allow people to live their lives without throwing at them some boycott list internet warriors like to feel superior and get mad over. Over this past month I watched the remake of beauty and the beast, I had a cheeseburger at McDonald's and drank a pumpkin spice late from starbucks. This doesn't make me a bad person

Personally, I don’t think a brand aligning themselves with a company that is so polarizing is a smart move. As far as the boycott goes, I do think for some people it’s very much virtue signaling to bring that up, for others it is yet one more sign that this brand/person doesn’t align with their values.

I think this fandom tends to act as though Harry set off an atomic bomb every time something he’s connected to is anything less than absolutely pure from every standpoint. The truth is somewhere in between.

People have been complaining that Harry isn’t connected to Pleasing since, maybe, the fourth drop. You can’t have it both ways. He can’t be so disconnected that you won’t buy it and you think it sucks, but simultaneously be angry at him for collaborating with a company you don’t support. Yes, his name is attached to Pleasing, and maybe he signed off on this collab, but I don’t think we can use it as a watershed moment where we all realize he’s actually a terrible person.

[a34trgv2]

Why It Worked: Inside Out

Introduction: Inside Out is an animated coming-of-age film produced by Pixar Animation Studios and distributed by Walt Disney Pictures. Directed and co-written by Pete Docter, with the screenplay being co written by Meg LaFauve and Josh Cooley, the film stars Amy Poehler, Phyliss Smith, Lewis Black, Mindy Kaling, Bill Hader, Kaitlyn Dias, Diane Lane, Kyle MacLachlan and Richard Kind as Joy, Sadness, Anger, Disgust, Fear, Riley, her parents Bill and Jill, and Bing Bong respectively. Released on June 19, 2015, the film was a major box office success grossing $858.8 million on a budget of $175 million. It also received critical acclaim from critics and audiences alike. According to Rotten Tomatoes, out of the 384 reviews aggregated, 98% gave a positive review with an average rating of 8.9/10. It also received numerous awards, including an Oscar for Best Animated Feature, several Outstanding Achievement Awards at the Annies, a Golden Globe for Best Animated Feature, and a Critic's Choice Movie Award for Best Animated Feature. It is often seen as a culturally significant film for mental health and the importance of expressing one's emotions. I saw this film for my birthday back in 2015 and I loved it right out of the gate. After multiple rewatches over the years, I stand by my personal opinion that this is a masterpiece of animation and visual storytelling. I'm overjoyed to talk about this film now that it finally has a sequel out.

The Plot: This film has 2 stories that are interconnected to one another, taking place in the mind of an 11 year old girl. On the outside, it's a bout a kid moving to a new city and being overwhelmed by the sudden changes happening all at once. On the inside, it's about Joy and Sadness trekking through Riley's mind, while along the way understanding each other's importance. Together, they create a very unique and engaging plot about growing up and learning to express yourself. The film brilliantly cuts between Riley, Joy and Sadness' journey, and what's happening at HQ to organically show what Riley's feeling and how her actions have psychological consequences. In addition to having powerful gut punching drama, it's also a very funny film with plenty of slapstick, goofy gags, and impressive word play that always gets me to belly laugh. Michael Giacchino also provides an enchanting, dreamlike score with great use of the piano and brass sections. The true highlight of the story is, of course, Pixar's masterfully crafted and innovative animation. The film makes Riley's mind so vibrant and expansive with Dream Productions and Imagination Land being major highlights. The outside world also looks very well done with the people looking very appealing, San Francisco looking grimy yet lived in, and Riley's old home in Minnesota looking very welcoming and colorful. Speaking of color, the use of colors in this film is nothing short of excellent from the radiant colors of Riley's memories, to Riley's clothes reflecting her current state of mind throughout the film. I also love how they use black and gray to represent faded memories and lack of emotion. If there's one word to describe Inside Out's story and animation, it's colorful.

Cast and Characters: This is an outstanding cast they brought on board for this film. Shout outs to the film's casting directors Natalie Lyon and Kevin Reher for picking out some excellent actors. Amy Poehler was phenomenal as Joy, perfectly capturing her bubbly and eccentric personality while also naturally showing her vulnerability and frustrations. Phyliss Smith sound perfectly dower and soft spoken as Sadness, yet at the same time making her sound so innocent and relatable. Lewis Black was the best match for Anger, making him sound crusty, cynical, and having a short fuse. Mindy Kaling brought in the right amount of sass and pettiness as Disgust and her comradery with the other emotions was brilliant. Bill Hader did a great job making Fear funny and relatable as a character. Kaitlyn Dias also deserve major props for her vocal performance as Riley, making her sound like a soft spoken but fun kid who goes through a great character arc in the film. Lastly, Richard Kind was the absolute surprise standout of the cast as Bing Bong as not only did he do a great job making him funny, but also made him relatable, selfless, a bit of an airhead, but also really resourceful. The cast did such a great job bringing these characters to life, with all of them being iconic and memorable in their own way.

Where It Falters: Outside of maybe adding another scene or 2 with Riley's life in Minnesota, I wouldn't change a thing with this film. It's one of those films where the only nitpick I have is I wanted more. Fortunately, that's remedied with the existence of the 2024 sequel. Coming out a couple years sooner wouldn't have been so bad either, but like I always say, quality>quantity.

Conclusion: There are a select few movies I consider to be a masterpiece. Inside Out is most certainly one of those movies. With outstanding writing, iconic characters, wonderful voice acting, masterfully crafted animation, and an enchanting score, it has more than earned its cultural significance. I cannot recommend this film enough, especially for those who struggle with expressing themselves such as yours truly. I promise this film will speak to you as it has for me after all these years. Thanks so much for reading and I'll see you soon ;)

[beardedmrbean]

"Disney wasn't an antisemite"

Uh you sure you wanna die on that hill?

How about we ask the Jewish Press what they think

Actress Meryl Streep reignited a debate that has simmered below the surface in Hollywood for decades: Was Walt Disney anti-Semitic?

The occasion was the annual awards event of the National Board of Review, an organization of filmmakers, students, and movie scholars. Streep presented an award to Emma Thompson, for her role in the new movie “Saving Mr. Banks,” about the making of the 1964 Disney film “Mary Poppins.” Thompson co-stars as Poppins author P.L. Travers, alongside Tom Hanks as Walt Disney.

Streep took the opportunity to blast Disney as racist and misogynist who also “supported an anti-Semitic industry lobbying group.”

She did not actually call Disney an anti-Semite, but many people took it that way. The Hollywood Reporter declared that Streep accused Disney of being “sexist, racist and anti-Semitic.” Film professor David Hajdu said Disney was “a deeply flawed human being. A misogynist? You bet. An anti-Semite? That, too.” An unnamed “female Academy member” interviewed by the Reporter referred to him as “that old anti-Semite, himself, Mr. Disney.”

Hollywood historian Neal Gabler examined the anti-Semitism charge in his 2006 biography of Disney. “Of the Jews who worked [with Disney], it was hard to find any who thought Walt was an anti-Semite,” Gabler reported. “Joe Grant, who had been an artist, the head of the model department, and the storyman responsible for Dumbo… declared emphatically that Walt was not an anti-Semite. ‘Some of the most influential people at the studio were Jewish,’ Grant recalled, thinking no doubt of himself, production manager Harry Tytle, and Kay Kamen [head of Disney’s merchandising arm], who once quipped that Disney’s New York office had more Jews than the Book of Leviticus. Maurice Rapf concurred that Walt was not anti-Semitic; he was just a ‘very conservative guy.’ ”

On the other hand, one former Disney animator, David Swift, has claimed he heard Walt make an anti-Semitic remark, and another ex-staffer, David Hilberman, has alleged that one employee was fired because he was Jewish. (However, according to Gabler, Disney himself was rarely involved in firing anyone except the top brass). In addition, the original animated version of the “Three Little Pigs” portrayed the Big Bad Wolf as a stereotypically Jewish peddler, although after complaints, the segment was altered.

When it comes to explicit proof that Disney was anti-Semitic, the critics’ case weakens.

“There is zero hard evidence that Disney ever wrote or said anything anti-Semitic in private or public,” according to Douglas Brode, author of Multiculturalism and the Mouse: Race and Sex in Disney Entertainment. Brode told The Hollywood Reporter that Disney used more Jewish actors “than any other studio of Hollywood’s golden age, including those run by Jewish movie moguls.”

Gabler also revealed that Disney “frequently” made unpublicized donations to a variety of Jewish charities, including a Jewish orphanage, a Jewish old age home, Yeshiva College (precursor to Yeshiva University), and the American League for a Free Palestine. The League, better known as the Bergson Group, publicly supported the armed revolt against the British in Palestine by Menachem Begin’s Irgun Zvai Leumi. Disney was embracing not just Zionism, but its most militant wing.

How, then, did the rumors of Disney’s alleged anti-Semitism spread so far and wide?

That’s where Meryl Streep comes in. The “anti-Semitic industry lobbying group” with which Disney was associated was the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals. The group’s statement of principles said nothing about Jews; its declared purpose was to prevent “Communist, Fascist, and other totalitarian-minded groups” from gaining a foothold in Hollywood. Among its members were politically conservative actors such as John Wayne, Clark Gable, and Ginger Rogers. But some of its other members were accused of being privately anti-Semitic, and in general it had a reputation as being reactionary.

Gabler believes that “the most plausible explanation” for the rumors about Disney were a kind of guilt by association: “Walt, in joining forces with the MPA and its band of professional reactionaries and red-baiters, also got tarred with their anti-Semitism. Walt Disney certainly was aware of the MPA’s purported anti-Semitism, but he chose to ignore it…. The price he paid was that he would always be lumped not only with anti-Communists but also with anti-Semites.”

The irony is that while Meryl Streep was condemning Walt Disney for associating with extremists, she herself was doing the very same thing. The actress to whom she gave that award when she made her anti-Disney speech, her close friend Emma Thompson, is active in the anti-Israel boycott movement.

Streep hailed Thompson as “splendid, beautiful, practically a saint…a living, acting conscience.” Yet this “saint,” together with other British actors, publicly urged a boycott of Israel’s Habimah theater troupe when it participated in a festival in England. Habimah, of course, has nothing to do with Israeli government policies or any political issues. Its only “crime” is that it’s Israeli.

By contrast, Thompson had no problem with the National Theater of China taking part in that festival, even though it really does represent the Chinese regime – a regime guilty of the most heinous human rights violations, aid to terrorists around the world, and support for the genocidal government of Sudan. But of course, hypocrisy is the hallmark of the “saints” of the anti-Israel boycott crusade. ______________________

The Antisemitism claim is literally communist propaganda.

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

Well, THAT's definitely big...

Jennifer Lee has stepped down as Chief Creative Officer of Walt Disney Animation Studios, following two genuine box office losses in STRANGE WORLD and WISH, in addition to several directors and staff leaving, some of which criticizing what the studio's output and workflow has become...

A decision she was apparently largely behind, herself, as she wants to continue her career as a director/writer/filmmaker and not lead a studio's creative process...

Taking her place is Jared Bush, who was a co-director and writer on ZOOTOPIA with Byron Howard and Rich Moore (both of them were considered to lead Disney Animation in 2018 when John Lasseter was being ousted), then graduated to director (no "co") on ENCANTO, and is confirmed to be the director of ZOOTOPIA 2. In addition to that, he did some script stuff for MOANA, and served as part of the studio's creative leadership for about a decade, his earliest WDAS credit being BIG HERO 6. Elsewhere in the Mouse domain, he co-created Disney TV Animation's PENN ZERO: PART-TIME HERO with former WDAS staffer Sam Levine, who was at one point set to direct the video game adventure movie that later evolved into WRECK-IT RALPH.

A lot of his prior work, curiously, was in network TV. Very little in animation, though. He got to WDAS when BIG HERO 6 was in the works, and immediately became part of the leadership there. Contrast that with Lee, whose only film/TV media credit prior to arriving at WDAS in 2011-ish to work on WRECK-IT RALPH's script was... A 2004 short film called A THOUSAND WORDS, which another RALPH writer - Phil Johnston - wrote and directed. Must've been a real referral! Soon after, Lee found herself writer and director on FROZEN, directing alongside veteran Chris Buck of TARZAN and SURF'S UP fame. That movie was a troubled-as-hell production, stuff was changed and re-arranged at the very last minute, it goes on to become the highest grossing animated movie (holding the title for nearly 6 years) and a worldwide phenomenon... And Disney Animation's first Oscar for Best Animated Feature winner.

So after that, after her story work on ZOOTOPIA, and after her exec roles on other movies, they made her CCO while she was deep in production on FROZEN II. Which despite being an equally troubled production where many last-minute changes were made, was still a huge box office smash... COVID-19 definitely hit her run as CCO like a freight train, as I do think RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON and ENCANTO would've fared well at the box office w/o a pandemic going on. The latter won the BAF Oscar and was a monster success on Disney+ in addition to having a 2x Platinum-selling soundtrack in the U.S. alone. I myself also feel that those two films are the strongest movies released during her tenure.

But even the good seemed to be marred by a lot of the things that were evident in Lasseter's tenure: Last-minute changes to things and upending whole movies the closer they get to the finish line, director removals and swaperoos (RAYA, particularly)... and much more caving to the focus groups. I also feel that Lee's storytelling instincts seemed to translate to "Well let's do every movie like FROZEN. The same kinda tone, art style, dialogue, etc." When it doesn't fit every movie, especially when they're going for genres that aren't what FROZEN is. I'd imagine it's the rest of the leadership too, and who she has to answer to and work with. Lasseter seemed to know how to skirt around focus groups for the most part, which could explain why some of the Lee-era movies just lack any kind of bite or even any kind of distinct directorial vision. When I hear stories like "The WISH co-director's 7-year-old kid got scared by the original ending, so they changed it", I do not approve. I don't think that's a good way of doing things. I kinda got the sense that she was unsure of herself being the leader and maybe trusted others over her own instincts... Thus her choosing to step down and focus on FROZEN III & IV and other projects checks out honestly.

The structure there has to change, really, no matter if Lee or Bush are leading the filmmaking charge. WDAS needs to worry less about living up to their legacy, and think more about creating new and dynamic kinds of movies that build a legacy in the first place. Like the way Walt himself and his crew did. That being said, Bush I think is a decent choice, with his experience and whatnot, he may do the leader thing just fine. MOANA 2 is likely the end of the Lee era then, as it's only two months away from release. ZOOTOPIA 2 is already in full production, as evidenced by the scene shown at D23 last month, so is that bridge to the Bush era? Or does little change under his role as CCO? Sometimes a filmmaker being CCO means the movies made by multiple people end up suiting that person's vision. And can lead to things being homogeneous.

We'll have to see, but it's a huge development nonetheless.

Lee has only lasted 6 years in charge, Lasseter lasted 11-12 years. His ouster was awkwardly prolonged when word got out about his inappropriate behavior, first going on "sabbatical leave" for half a year, and then being in some "consultant" role at the company before leaving altogether over one full year after the accusations got out.

Another cool detail about this change... Lee's directing partner on FROZEN III & IV is Marc Smith, not Chris Buck like the first two movies. Buck also directed WISH, and I wonder if - since he's free of FROZEN duties - he's staying at WDAS or he packs his bags and directs somewhere's else? WISH didn't seem like a particularly rewarding production for anybody, in addition to becoming a critical dud (a rare one for WDAS, with a low Rotten aggregate) and box office disaster, sooooo... That remains to be seen. As is what the 2026 original movie is... Maybe that's why Lee was weirdly quiet about it at D23...

[haggishlyhagging]

Media critic Jennifer L. Pozner has spent thousands of hours and an immense amount of patience watching both cable news and reality television, and understands better than the average person how alike they've become. "We treat stories that we would have never treated as journalism twenty years ago like headline news," she muses. And we treat reality TV the same way. More relevant to feminism, however, is how the reality genre has harnessed the belief in a postfeminist world and, in doing so, reframed retrograde gender dynamics as expressions of freedom and empowerment. Far more than any backlash could have predicted, the feminist rhetoric of individuality, opportunity, autonomy, and choice has been co-opted by a consumer media that has very non-ulterior motives for presenting women as willingly sexualized, hyperfeminine ciphers.

In Pozner's 2010 book Reality Bites Back: The Troubling Truth About Guilty-Pleasure Television, she asserts that one of the most jarring features of reality TV is the way it urges its female participants—and often, the women and girls who watch them—toward narrower and narrower definitions of beauty, self-worth, and success, as well as a truncated sense of what kind of life is possible and desirable, all while encouraging them to see other women only in terms of competition and comparison. But "reality" functions as a magic shield against accusations of racist and sexist cliché and regressive storylines: producer and participants alike will reason that if you put twenty-five women in a room with a man they barely know, of course the evening will end with the women sobbing, yelling, yanking each other's hair extensions out, calling each other sluts, and drunkenly slurring, "We're meant to be together" to floor lamps. Reality TV is part of an ongoing narrative of postfeminism that, like Wonderbra billboards once did, assures women that feminism has granted them the power and the freedom to be whatever they want to be. And if what they want to be just so happens to conform to a smorgasbord of insecure, catty, vapid, and villainous stereotypes that even Walt Disney's frozen head would reject as too cartoonish, who's to say that's not empowering?

Let's take The Bachelor because, since it's one of the highest-rated network shows for more than a decade, we kind of have to. Since its debut in 2002, ABC's reality flagship has drawn in advertisers' favorite cash-cow demographic, women 18-34, by the millions, and has served as a barometer of how young, heterosexual, and mostly white women are encouraged to alter their ambitions, personalities, and behaviors to compete in the dating market. The show, mused media critic Susan J. Douglas when it premiered, "offers highly normative female ‘types’ into which most women allegedly fall ... urged to place themselves on a post-feminist scale of femininity to determine how far they have to go to please men without losing all shreds of their own identity and dignity. In the process, young women calibrate, for better and for worse, what kind of female traits are most likely to ensure success in a male-dominated world." For twenty seasons, the series has confirmed centuries' worth of entrenched beliefs about what women want (marriage, money, the knowledge that they've beaten out masses of other women for the a man they barely know), and what men seek (a thin, deferential woman who's only as ambitious as she needs to be to bag a husband).

-Andi Zeisler, We Were Feminists Once

[dorothydalmati1]

Obscure Animation Subject #71: All Dogs Go to Heaven

Originally posted on Twitter on May 21, 2023.

Happy birthday to me! Since its my birthday today, why not talk about a feature film for a change?

It is directed by Don Bluth with a screenplay by David N. Weiss from a story by various people in the industry business.

The film is a collaboration between Goldcrest Films and Sullivan Bluth Studios Ireland Ltd., a co-production between the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United States, it was distributed by United Artists in the US and Rank Film Distributors in the UK and Ireland.

Released on November 17, 1989 in the US, February 8, 1990 in the UK and April 6, 1990 in Ireland, it follows a shepherd named Charlie B. Barkin, whose murdered by his former friend, Carface Carruthers. Charlie escapes from Heaven to return to Earth where his best friend, Itchy Itchiford.

Charlie still lives, in order to take revenge on Carface. Instead, he ends up befriending a young orphan girl named Anne-Marie (voiced by Judith Barsi in her final film role). In the process, Charlie learns an important lesson about kindness, friendship and love.

On its US release, it competed directly with Walt Disney's The Little Mermaid, released on the same day. While it did not repeat the box-office success of Sullivan Bluth's previous features, it was successful on home video, becoming one of the biggest-selling VHS releases ever.

And, its a very bizarre piece of animation I will say. Critics were polarized on the film and I was confused when watching, being a serious film about death that the gabling Shepherd is facing, then shifts to a cutesy tone when the girl comes in then, dark as hell?

Yeah, this is the most bizarre film from Bluth. It didn’t do very well at the box-office when competing with the superior Little Mermaid, but when it was released on home media, it became a sleeper hit and has been on top of the VHS sales, forming a cult following.

It was so successful that a theatrical sequel, a television show and direct-to-video holiday film were produced. Afterwards though, nothing from the franchise came since. However, it still has its fandom and like The Little Mermaid, it may get its live-action remake, who knows…

It may not be the best from Bluth, but I highly recommend it if your curious. It’s such an interesting film to discuss about, although it went through more hell than heaven. Kinda a shame it did because the sequel sucked, the TV show is meh and the Christmas film also sucked.

[masterthespianduchovny]

Hello Pitches,

I know we all took and continue to take the Pitch cancellation hard no matter how much time has passed. For many of us, including me, it still feels fresh. As an aside, I believe I went under the name leftenantscullbagg or Leavingwestcovina when I was active in the Pitch fandom. Some of you may know me by my AO3 handle, 2shytheshippy. I worked closely with PST and was one of the many fans who donated money to fly the banner. :) This is all to say, despite my inactivity, I’m not new to this fandom and had to remove myself because of how devastating it was for me. I was in the trenches with many of the pitches back then.

Here’s the thing: Pitch almost came back in 2019 or 2020 and, as much as I hate to admit it, Disney had a point when they said Pitch doesn’t really fit the Disney plus brand (or even Hulu for that matter).

But here’s the other thing: No doesn’t mean never. The old writing staff was literally called to begin planning a season two storyline. MPG was beginning to grow out his beard again. This was a real thing that almost happened. Then, once it fell apart, we went quiet. I know how emotionally draining campaigning for a show is, however, we have to reapply the pressure. There are several ways a long dormant show can come back and to name three of them: an exec who has interest in reviving a show, a powerful person in Hollywood advocating for the show, and/or persistent fan campaigns—sometimes a combination of all three.

The X-Files got brought back because Dana Waldman (then TV exec for Hulu now like the president of Disney television or something) and Gary Newman were excited to revive it, esp because they’re the ones who originally got it on air. Justified is returning because Quentin Tarantino was interested in shooting something for a later book in the series and things snowballed from there. Veronica Mars was brought back because fans never gave up on the show—the fastest kickstarter campaign to reach 2 million dollars in like less than a day, which led to a movie being made. Down the line, this likely HEAVILY influenced execs to revive the show on Hulu. That movie was made SEVEN years after it’s first cancellation and the revival happened TWELVE years later.

Now some perhaps immediately noticed that all of these shows had multiple seasons, which is true, but it’s also besides the point, which is: there is always a chance, esp when it almost came back, if you’re persistent enough and execs know a fandom (read: money) is there.

Things that also helps: Pitch was a critical darling, this show still has articles that directly writes about it or mentions the show in various lists even in 2022, and Dan’s success with This Is Us including Emmy success—nomination and win(s). That means something. Maybe not a lot on it’s own, but with persistent and increased fan support, it could make a helluva difference.

Now, some of you may be thinking about me saying “Disney had a point”, so am I like contradicting myself or something???

Here’s one more thing: Disney plus isn’t the only service/channel the Walt Disney co has. They also have Hulu (also may be out), ABC, FX, FX on Hulu, and Freeform. As mentioned, I don’t see Pitch being a match for Hulu, ABC is also questionable for me, and Freeform is a hard no. I also think that Pitch doesn’t gel with cable FX, which leaves FX on Hulu. That’s where we should advocate where Pitch’s new home should be. It may sound confusing because “it’s still Disney, right”, but it makes a difference to the Walt Disney Group. I also think that FX is more supportive and takes more chances on it’s shows. Their content is also very diverse, I believe.

But the other option, the non Disney option: Apple TV Plus.

I promise you all, back in 2017–way, way before Ted Lasso was even pitched to execs (I know this IP has existed since 2013, but I believe it I was pitched either 2018 and after), I literally wrote like a card or letter to Apple, but never sent it. I think this was before their streaming service launched, but I’ve always seen the potential in Apple TV Plus.

Why?

Not only could Apple do cross promotion out of the ass in a way that isn’t obvious promotion (or promotion that will get them called out on), they could exploit so many branding deals with Ginny’s character (read: Nike, who Apple has a close relationship with and who canonically sponsor’s Ginny; Beats, which she wears, athleisure wear, you get the point), and they (now) have a deal with the MLB, which Disney doesn’t since FOX sports is it’s own separate thing.

The biggest thing would be selling Apple on picking up the series. It’s not uncommon for show’s to be shot on one studio lot/produced by someone else and air on another channel/studio. That is effectively what was going on with Pitch. Hell, when Timeless was picked up for a second season, Sony sold their shares to NBC to offset the shooting cost. This was after NBC, I believe, tried to get another network or streamer to pick it up.

And by being on streaming, Pitch doesn’t have to have network ratings—they can have more grace and flexibility than trying to achieve ratings that’s only really possible for procedural, certain comedies, and truly break out hit shows. It was never a good fit on FOX and they dropped the ball when backing this show. Streaming is a much better fit.

Someone also pointed out that now since This Is Us has ended, it’s the perfect time for Pitch to return to TV since Dan is free as far as we know. Yes, Kylie is currently on a show, but we can always start with a special or whatever.

@anditendshowyoudexpect @slaymaxuwu @livviedoo @marialovesdean @professionalprocrastinator22 @bettinesarai @theblackpearlofwakanda @idealuk @saturnineaqua @uwugroovy @mdgart @harvestleaves @eemlarsson @loockxs @straightoutoffuckstogive @lesbianmaxevans @flawlessxian @livelovecaliforniadreams @manny-jacinto @firelord-jerkbender @hightidelowmood @classsictrash @timlucys @reinamycloud @rakshasi-sue @pearlcaddy @littlewillowcabins @runningfromadream @tonybalerdi @idontwikeit @be-curious-and-not-judgemental @blueshoesandbluemountains @wildcard47 @hopetorun @kethromega @danielshoneybadger @sarascofield27 @bamonisreal @socalshipping @moonlightcher @lerayon @beckstraordinary @wearesociety @femmenerdy @lyanaalvarado @texasbama @macaroni-rascal

If you can’t bear to go down this road again, I can understand ignoring this and moving on. If you want to see how far we can take this, click the discord link and tag people if you know of any who’d be interested in participating.

I’m currently still brainstorming about effective campaigns we can run, who we can talk to, and how to cultivate interest in this show to get more people watching. We need all of these things in our favor to turn the tide in our direction.

[courseyoulovemeyoudontknowme]

WALL-E (2008, Andrew Stanton)

22/03/2024

WALL-E is a 2008 CGI animated film, directed by Andrew Stanton; produced by Pixar Animation Studios, in co-production with Walt Disney Pictures, and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures.

The film, created and written by Stanton himself together with Pete Docter and Jim Reardon, is the ninth Pixar feature film and tells the story of the robot WALL-E, who in the distant future is the only inhabitant of the planet Earth, now abandoned by human beings due to excessive pollution and the continuous accumulation of waste.

The film was acclaimed by critics for the quality of the animation, the technology, the story and the soundtrack, obtaining numerous awards, including the 2009 Oscar for best animated film (out of 7 nominations), the Golden Globe and the BAFTA in the same category. It is dedicated to Justin Wright, a Pixar animator who died in the company's studios on March 18, 2008.

In 2105 the level of pollution on planet Earth is very high, with the Earth's surface now completely covered in garbage.

People on the Axiom move in floating seats through which they can also feed themselves drinks and communicate only by speaking through holographic screens.

WALL-E gives the planet to EVE, who closes it inside herself, after which the two sympathize, kiss and begin to fly in space, attracting the attention of two humans.

AUTO then uses his taser to melt the robot's central memory, which falls unconscious and with the plant inside it into the waste dump together with EVE, who is turned off.

In the meantime, the captain manages to stand up and grab AUTO, then deactivate it and take manual control of the spaceship, directing it towards Earth with a hyperjump.

WALL-E: is the protagonist of the film, he is similar to a cube equipped with two tracks moved by three gears each. He is equipped with two cameras as eyes, mechanical arms that allow him to grasp objects and a device that allows him to compact waste.

EVE outwardly resembles Jony Ive's designs for Apple, Inc. (owner of Pixar), in particular the iMac G3.

Upon the announcement of the discovery of the plant, the commander is initially scared because of the radical change that returning to Earth will entail, but thanks to the involuntary help of WALL-E he remains fascinated by the plant (using his time to research Earth on the computer of the spaceship) and will do anything to get home.

AUTO: is the main antagonist of the film, "voiced" in the original by the MacInTalk computer program (developed by Apple).

[squideo]

Squideo’s Favourites: WALL·E 🌱

Released in 2008 as Pixar Animation Studio’s ninth feature film, its third since the company was purchased by the Walt Disney Company in 2006, WALL·E had been in the works since the nineties. Created by Andrew Stanton and Pete Docter, this fast classic has become one of Pixar’s standout films. So much so that Disney pushed for an Academy Award Best Picture nomination.

Controversially, this wasn’t accepted by the judges but WALL·E did go on to win their Best Animated Feature prize, and also scooped it up at the BAFTAs, Golden Globes, Hugo Awards, People’s Choice Awards, Saturn Awards, and many more. It even scored two Grammys for Randy Newman and Peter Gabriel’s music performances.

We’re diving into the production behind this animated film, exploring the style and techniques which came together to create this compelling story.

Creating a Story

When Andrew Stanton first came up with the idea for WALL·E, the premise was simple: “what if mankind left Earth and somebody forgot to turn the last robot off?” This was first pitched in 1994 when the young company was thinking about its future films, yet WALL·E wouldn’t start production until 2003 – eventually making it onto screens in 2008.

Stanton continued to develop the idea of a Robinson Crusoe robot with Pete Docter in the nineties, even as both went on to direct other Pixar projects – Finding Nemo (2003) and Monsters, Inc (2001) respectively. There was doubt, however, that this film could be pulled off. Pixar had created anthropomorphised robots before in its first animated short Luxo Jr. (1986). The lamp depicted in this short would become Pixar’s mascot, but was a feature film about a robot something that could be compellingly animated?

What helped to move WALL·E into production was the release of the massively successful Finding Nemo. Like robots, fish weren’t expressive. Like outer space, water was difficult to animate. And yet they pulled it off, releasing what became the highest-grossing animated feature film of all time up to that point and Pixar’s first Academy Award winner. Directed by Stanton, he now had the attention of the company who were eager to hear his next idea.

“WALL-E was a very conscious dive into risk. I knew nobody really wanted to make it. But I also knew nobody could say no to me because Nemo was just so big… we’d been so successful at that point that we could afford the hiccup. If we called it wrong economically or critically, we’d survive it.” Andrew Stanton

The film centred on two robots who only spoke when communicating their names and directives. The majority of WALL·E’s first half is largely free of dialogue, with the exception of live-action recordings from Hello, Dolly! (1969) and Buy n Large’s owner. Many robot characters only converse with chirps and beeps, and the only robot with full lines of dialogue is 2001: A Space Odyssey-inspired villain Auto.

Key to getting WALL·E into production was the approval of Steve Jobs, who was Pixar’s primary investor and acted as their co-founder and chairman. Jobs split his time at Pixar with Apple where, in 2004, an exciting new product was announced to a select number of people: the development of the first iPhone. The developments at Apple ended up having a profound impact on WALL·E, with the team at Pixar receiving prototype phones before the general public. The film was punctuated throughout with Apple references, using the sound of the Mac boot-up chime when WALL·E finishes charging, and the iPod and iPhone inspiring EVE’s design.

The story is built on themes of environmentalism and global catastrophe, examining consumerism and complacency. One of Pixar and Disney’s most politically themed films, WALL·E attracted conservative criticism but that didn’t stop it from performing at the box office: grossing $532 million worldwide. Receiving widespread acclaim, WALL·E became the second Pixar feature film to be preserved by the National Film Registry and Library of Congress in 2021. In 2022, WALL·E also became Pixar’s first film selected by The Criterion Collection.

Animation Style

While other Pixar films typically generated between 50 and 75,000 storyboards for each production, WALL·E ended up with over 125,000 drawings and 96,000 storyboards. A lot of thought had to go into the character’s design, since their emotions would have to be conveyed physically rather than verbally.

“Robots are a huge challenge, because robots are function-based machines. When you’re drawing them, you can only make up so much stuff that doesn’t actually function, or the person looking at them, even if they’re not engineers themselves, they’re going to notice that that joint wouldn’t actually work. So it became important to look at actual robots. You can only make so much up out of your head.” Jason Dreamer

The team looked at a variety of robots, including those made for bomb disposal. For Jim Reardon, head of story for WALL•E, it was important that they didn’t “draw human-looking robots with arms, legs, heads and eyes, and have them talk. We wanted to take objects that you normally wouldn’t associate with having humanlike characteristics and see what we could get out of them through design and animation.”

To help, Stanton arranged film screenings of classic silent films from the likes of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton to show how silent film actors told stories without reliance on dialogue.

To create the wasteland that WALL·E is left behind in, the animators looked at everything from local dumps to the abandoned city of Chernobyl. For the modern ship Axiom, they looked to Disneyland’s Tomorrowland and cruise ships. To design the human characters, they consulted with physiologist James Hicks to find out the effects of atrophy and prolonged weightlessness while living in space, proving that no detail was too small for the team behind WALL·E.

All of these considerations created a future that seems tangible, and helps to drive the importance of the film’s themes. WALL·E ends on an optimistic note, with Jim Capobianco’s end credits which show the evolution of humanity through different schools of art. For audiences facing the realities of climate change and environmental destruction, this confidence in the power of humanity to fix our world is the right ending. Perhaps explaining why it is one of the few Pixar films to receive no sequel or animated shorts. The story is perfect as it is.

Get Started With Your Video

Inspired to create a unique animated video of your own? Watch the video below to get a better understanding of how Squideo can help promote your business, then get in touch with us to find out more!

[maximumwobblerbanditdonut]

Dame Virginia McKenna: How Born Free changed her life forever

Founder of the Horsham-based Born Free Foundation – award-winning actress Virginia McKenna – has been awarded a damehood in the New Year Honours 2023.

The story of George and Joy Adamson and the orphaned lion cub, Elsa, they adopt.🦁 Sixty years ago, Virginia McKenna had an epiphany on Born Free that diverted her to animal conservation.

It was the most successful animal story of modern times: a worldwide best-seller read by 50m people and translated into 21 languages telling the true-life tale of the game warden who adopted an orphaned lion cub.

The book was Born Free. The author was Joy Adamson who, with her husband George, raised Elsa the lioness and in doing so told a story of two people sharing a spontaneous love of nature and freeborn wildlife.

In 1964, Virginia McKenna and her husband Bill Travers became engaged to play Joy Adamson and her husband, George. The experience of Kenya's Naro Moru Game Reserve, the scenery and the lions would change their lives forever. Known equally for the double act of McKenna and Travers, for the lioness Elsa and for THAT unforgettable theme song sung by Matt Monro.

The road to what would become an Oscar-winning hit: York-born John Barry won for both his score and song, written by Don Black. What would become a huge success for Columbia began as a Walt Disney film. However, when Disney and original director Tom McGowan left the project, Bradford-born James Hill was hired. Suddenly all the key ingredients came together.

Virginia, along with her late husband Bill Travers and eldest son Will, 1984 co-founded Zoo Check, an organisation critical of the exploitation of wild animals in zoos and circuses, which went on to become the Born Free Foundation.

#Dame Virginia McKenna #Born Free #New Year Honours 2023

@imahalfemptykindofgirl Because you follow your heart 🎈

[intothewildsstuff]

Disney beats investor lawsuit over feud with DeSantis | Reuters

Fucking conservatives

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

DreamWorks’ Great Reset?

This looks to have been a banner year for DreamWorks Animation LLC.

Pierre Perifel’s THE BAD GUYS was a critical and commercial success, once again a showcase of their software and how they can produce such dynamic visuals without spending as much as Disney Animation and Pixar do each time out on features. The incoming PUSS IN BOOTS: THE LAST WISH, the belated sequel to the SHREK spin-off from Joel Crawford, is already a critical darling, already has a Golden Globe nomination, and appears to be Universal’s over-all big push for the animated feature Oscar. It’s sure to make some decent money, too!

Universal in general seems to have had a fantastic animated year, when you add in 3/4 of SING 2′s gross, as that movie was a late December opening. Then you have MINIONS: THE RISE OF GRU, which is the highest-earning animated movie since the 2019 release of FROZEN II... Not too shabby. The Walt Disney Company, by contrast, had some real pains this year. I liked all three of the big-time animated movies released by them this year (not counting D+ pics like RESCUE RANGERS, the new WIMPY KID, and the NIGHT AND THE MUSEUM continuation), but the way they were handled and released didn’t work out. Bob Chapek is out as CEO, and a restructuring of his way of running the movie end of the business is already underway. Even though COVID-19 is still a thing, audiences have returned en masse to the movies... Especially proven by the biggest blockbusters this year, from TOP GUN: MAVERICK to JURASSIC WORLD DOMINION to Disney’s own BLACK PANTHER: WAKANDA FOREVER... TURNING RED, LIGHTYEAR, and STRANGE WORLD could’ve definitely benefited from that, but for various reasons... Did not.

But not Universal... They weathered the storm, they smartly delayed pictures and stayed committed to the theatrical release. MINIONS 2, for example, was pretty much ready to go for a summer 2020 release. After the outbreak of COVID-19, they pushed it to summer 2021, but it seemed like things - even with vaccines out - still had a ways to go, they pushed it to summer 2022... Probably the best thing they did for that feature... I couldn’t imagine it making the kind of money it did this past summer, in summer 2021.

DreamWorks is a curious case, really. DreamWorks had many growing pains in the early 2010s. Being independent, each movie they made had to be a big hit in order to keep the place afloat. Problem was, whatever they were doing at the time... And being based in Cali didn’t help, it lead to their animated movies costing $125m minimum... That puts a ridiculous strain on a movie like, say, TURBO or MR. PEABODY & SHERMAN. If those had cost half of what they ended up costing, they’d be considered minor hits... But with those budgets, they were crushing flops. Animators and staff bore the brunt of it, too. Layoffs, pictures being cancelled (R.I.P. ME AND MY SHADOW), restructurings... An entire studio shut down, too. R.I.P. Pacific Data Images.

Comcast bought DreamWorks in 2016, and the studio’s distribution deal with 20th Century Fox was cut off the year after, with a few more movies being put into limbo (THE CROODS 2) or outright cancelled. (LARRIKINS) It was a rocky transition, and it seemed like the game plan and leadership changed a lot. For a little while, Chris DeFaria was heading up animation and some projects with a lot of potential got optioned or even slated... Only to go the way of the quagga. The studio took 2018 off (which was when LARRIKINS would’ve opened), and came back with a HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON threequel with a baffling ending (though it nonetheless scored great reviews and solid box office) and a co-production called ABOMINABLE. Somewhere down the line, DeFaria was out, and later in came from Margie Cohn from DreamWorks’ TV animation division... Running both wings, now. COVID-19 cut into TROLLS WORLD TOUR, which did stellar business as a PVOD title in April 2020. Universal tested a theatrical/PVOD strategy with THE CROODS: A NEW AGE, which paid off nicely.

TROLLS 2 and CROODS 2 marked the beginning of DreamWorks’ new way of budgeting their animated movies. CROODS 2 especially. The first movie cost them $135m to make back in 2013, the sequel? $65m... And it looked just as good as the original. 2021 saw the release of SPIRIT: UNTAMED, which didn’t do well, but THE BOSS BABY: FAMILY BUSINESS scored okay enough as a hybrid release. THE BAD GUYS was their first big-time theatrical release in a while, and it performed pretty well! Now PUSS IN BOOTS Dos looks to really make a wallop, and be their biggest pic in a while.

In the lead up the film, they’ve created an all-new logo that showcases characters from their past films/series. There’s talk I hear from the trenches that indicates that they are on their way to a grand reset of sorts, now that they’ve found their footing.

Though surprisingly, their slate seems rather incomplete.

They have two features coming out next year, and the only one that got any kind of formal announcement is the 2nd of the batch... TROLLS BAND TOGETHER, which is currently slated for November 17, 2023. That title had been quietly rumored for some time, but European Universal documents confirm it is so. The picture also seems to be releasing earlier in territories like Switzerland, mid-October. Wouldn’t be surprised if it moves there in the U.S. as well, given that the current date puts it five days before Disney Animation’s centennial celebration feature WISH. We’ll have to see...

A feature called MEET THE GILMANS (or is it GILLMANS? I’ve seen two spellings of it) has been quietly rumored for quite some time, too, and has popped up - mysteriously - on the resumes of DWA staffers. Little is known about it, apparently it has to do with a family of sea monsters. That’s kind of similar to the Pixar picture LUCA, but animated movies with similar premises are a regular occurrence. Not everything is an ANTZ/A BUG’S LIFE scenario... Anyways, it’s pretty much all we know plus a few other things. An Italian Universal recently executive confirmed the movie’s existence and it being a summer release, despite no U.S. records showing that. Universal did previously have the date 6/30/2023 reserved for Illumination’s Benjamin Renner comedy MIGRATION, but then moved that to the Christmas season... Not at all suggesting that a DreamWorks movie had taken its place. There was a DreamWorks movie set for late March of 2023 at one point, but Illumination’s SUPER MARIO BROS. movie took the first weekend of April instead. Additionally, that Swiss release calendar that got out indicates that MEET THE GILMANS indeed opens in late June of 2023...

So GILMANS is our mystery movie here. It exists, yet it kind of doesn’t. This, strangely, isn’t new for DreamWorks... But this close to release and we know next to nothing about it? THE BAD GUYS had gotten a similar rollout. I reckon once PUSS IN BOOTS Dos opens, DreamWorks and Universal announce GILMAN as their summer 2023 picture, or even unveil the new slate of movies that has been quietly prepared all this time...

The only other movie on their slate is KUNG FU PANDA 4, currently scheduled for March 8, 2024. Notably, that date places it after Pixar’s ELIO (3/1/2024) and a few weeks before Sony’s SPIDER-MAN: BEYOND THE SPIDER-VERSE (3/29/2024)... Another tidbit that surfaced concerns KUNG FU PANDA 4, actually... Joel Crawford is directing. The man seems to be the DreamWorks Franchise Reviver of sorts. Directed CROODS: A NEW AGE, this new PUSS IN BOOTS movie, and now a KUNG FU PANDA that arrives eight years after its predecessor. Will he be the one to bring MADAGASCAR back as well? DreamWorks did have a MADAGASCAR 4 in the works that they scrapped during their growing pains years, who’s to say that can’t be revived? After all, a different version of PUSS IN BOOTS 2 was also shelved right around the same time as that MADAGASCAR 4 project. CROODS 2 was also a shelf-and-restart situation.

But what else? I hear their game plan is an original and a sequel every calendar year. 2022 filled that quota: BAD GUYS (yes, I know, a book adaptation... But not a sequel to something. That’s what I mean by “original”) and PUSS IN BOOTS.

Next year: MEET THE GILMANS and TROLLS BAND TOGETHER.

2024... KUNG FU PANDA 4... And?

What’s a possible candidate? In the recent years, DreamWorks has announced a plethora of optioned material and original stories, and many of them disappeared. At one time we could’ve seen an adaptation of THE WIZARDS OF ONCE - a book series by HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON author Cressida Cowell - come out, or an adaptation of MICE AND MYSTICS. In 2020, two projects were announced: An adaptation of Dav Pilkey’s DOG MAN (same man who created CAPTAIN UNDERPANTS, which DreamWorks adapted into a movie in 2017), and an adaptation of Thomas Lennon’s RONAN BOYLE AND THE BRIDGE OF RIDDLES... There’s also an untitled picture that’s to be made in collaboration with Unanimous Media.

Out of all these, I reckon it’s either one or the other. DOG MAN could go through given how CAPTAIN UNDERPANTS did for DreamWorks and the additional stuff it spawned (such as the Netflix series), and the fun style of Pilkey’s work is already right in line with what DreamWorks does. It also has a director in Peter Hastings, who worked on several TV projects for DreamWorks, including the CAPTAIN UNDERPANTS stuff. He was also - supposedly - at one point eyed to direct the UNDERPANTS movie, and at one time... The first HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON!

RONAN BOYLE has Fergal Reilly as its director, and original author Thomas Lennon as screenwriter. I’m leaning on this one being their other 2024 release, likely a fall debut. Late September. DreamWorks seems to like that slot a lot. CROODS 2 was aiming for it in 2020 until COVID-19 pushed it to Thanksgiving, BOSS BABY 2 was looking at it for 2021 but got moved up to July 2021, PUSS IN BOOTS could’ve been a September 2022 release but it went to this coming Christmas week...

Curiously, Universal has one other animated movie set for 2024... February 9, 2024 to be exact... But no specification. Illumination? DreamWorks? Something else? Universal does have the rights to the LEGO movies and will make the next one, be it THE LEGO MOVIE 3 or something else... But I don’t know if it’s ready for February 2024... I reckon KUNG FU PANDA 4 moves to that slot instead, leaving March to ELIO and SPIDER-VERSE. Illumination releases DESPICABLE ME 4 in summer 2024, I think it’ll be their only picture for that year. What else do they even have in development? A picture called BIG TREE, an untitled Pharrell Williams films that feels like it was announced eons ago, and a third SECRET LIFE OF PETS movie.

Anyways, here’s what I see so far...

06/30/2023: MEET THE GILMANS

11/17/2023: TROLLS BAND TOGETHER

02/09/2024: KUNG FU PANDA 4

09/27/2024: RONAN BOYLE

2025: SHREK 5

2025: DOG MAN

There’s also a third BOSS BABY movie in the works, and a third CROODS as well. Not sure where those will all fit in when all is said and done, but... We’ll only know from either Universal or DreamWorks themselves. Interestingly, the Swiss slate also adds late September 2025 and late September 2026 for “Untitled Animated Event Films”... I’m pretty sure those will be for DreamWorks movies, and in the U.S., the exact dates would probably be 9/26/2025 and 9/25/2026. Illumination typically takes the summer and Christmas slots, though sometimes they share. MARIO opens in April of next year, with GILMANS in the June slot, and we’ve got PUSS IN BOOTS opening in a few days... But I think everything goes back to the usual after next year.

So...

06/30/2023: MEET THE GILMANS (DreamWorks)

11/17/2023: TROLLS BAND TOGETHER (DreamWorks)

12/22/2023: MIGRATION (Illumination)

02/09/2024: KUNG FU PANDA 4 (DreamWorks)

07/03/2024: DESPICABLE ME 4 (Illumination)

09/27/2024: RONAN BOYLE (DreamWorks)

Early 2025: Untitled LEGO Movie (LEGO Group)

Spring 2025: SHREK 5 (DreamWorks)

Summer 2025: Untitled Illumination

09/26/2025: DOG MAN (DreamWorks)

Christmas 2025: Untitled Illumination

Spring 2026: THE CROODS 3 (DreamWorks)

Summer 2026: Untitled Illumination

09/25/2026: Untitled DreamWorks Original

It was fun to predict this stuff back in the day, so... We shall see.

[enterprisewired]

Disney to Name Bob Iger’s Successor in 2026, Appoints James Gorman as New Chair

Source: telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com

Share Post:

LinkedIn

Twitter

Facebook

Reddit

Walt Disney Company has officially set a timeline for the announcement of Bob Iger’s successor as CEO, signaling a critical milestone in its leadership transition. On Monday, Disney announced that the company would name Iger’s replacement in early 2026, marking the first time the entertainment giant has set a formal timetable for this crucial decision.

The move is seen as a long-awaited step toward addressing Disney’s succession challenges, which have plagued the company for several years. Iger, known for transforming Disney through key acquisitions, including Pixar, Marvel, and Lucasfilm, has had his retirement date extended multiple times. Initially returning from retirement in 2022 after his chosen successor, Bob Chapek, was ousted, Iger had planned to stay for two years but later extended his tenure until 2026.

While the announcement comes as a relief to many investors, the search for a suitable successor to Bob Iger remains a critical challenge. Disney has yet to make a final decision, with several internal and external candidates in the running for the role. The succession plan will be closely monitored as Disney aims to ensure a smooth leadership transition before Iger’s expected departure.

James Gorman to Lead Disney’s Board as Chair

In addition to revealing the CEO succession timeline, Disney also announced the appointment of James Gorman, a veteran executive from Morgan Stanley, as its new chairman of the board. Gorman, who will take over the role on January 2, 2024, brings a wealth of experience, having served as CEO of Morgan Stanley for 14 years, where he led the firm through significant growth, particularly in its wealth management division.

Gorman’s leadership in executing Morgan Stanley’s own succession plan, which saw Ted Pick assume the CEO role while other contenders remained at the firm, has earned him praise from peers. His focus on transparency and rigor in leadership transitions is expected to play a key role as Disney embarks on its search fo rBob Iger’s replacement.

The appointment of Gorman comes as Mark Parker, the current chair of Disney and executive chairman of Nike, steps down after nine years on Disney’s board. Parker expressed confidence in Gorman’s leadership, noting that his experience would be instrumental in guiding Disney through its CEO succession process, a top priority for the board.

Candidates for Disney’s CEO Role Emerge

As Disney gears up for the 2026 leadership transition, several internal candidates are emerging as potential successors to Bob Iger. Among the contenders is Dana Walden, Disney Entertainment Co-Chair, who is seen as a creative executive with a track record of success in television. Walden’s deep relationships with talent and her creative vision align closely with Bob Iger’s leadership style, making her a strong candidate.

Other potential successors include Josh D’Amaro, the charismatic chairman of Disney Experiences, who oversees the company’s lucrative theme park operations, and Jimmy Pitaro, the chairman of ESPN, known for spearheading the sports network’s digital transformation. Alan Bergman, a Disney veteran who oversees the company’s film studios, is also seen as a strong contender, having led successful box office hits this year.

Disney’s board, led by Gorman, will continue to evaluate both internal and external candidates as the company prepares for its leadership transition. As the process unfolds, investors and analysts will keep a close watch on the company’s efforts to ensure a smooth and successful handover in 2026.

[secretstalks]

Overcoming the Gender Gap in ‘Founder Mode’: Insights from Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky on Women Founders’ Challenges

The tech world has been abuzz with discussions about “founder mode” this week, a management approach that emphasizes direct involvement from founders rather than relying heavily on delegation. This concept has sparked varied reactions, particularly among different groups of founders.

Brian Chesky, CEO of Airbnb, recently highlighted this discussion, prompting Paul Graham, co-founder of the startup accelerator Y Combinator, to write an essay on the topic. Graham described founder mode as a hands-on approach to managing a company, contrasting it with “manager mode,” which typically involves delegating responsibilities and allowing team members more autonomy.

Chesky's remarks on founder mode sparked significant conversation, especially on social media. He noted that women founders have reached out to him, expressing that they feel excluded from adopting founder mode in the same way men might. Chesky emphasized that this disparity needs to be addressed.

In response to a query about what he meant by “permission,” Chesky shared a screenshot of a 2020 Business Insider article titled, “The Fall of the Girl Boss is Actually a Good Thing.” The article discussed several female founders who resigned due to claims of hostile work environments, highlighting broader issues of workplace culture and gender.

Chesky also retweeted stories from female entrepreneurs who claimed they faced negative repercussions for embracing founder mode, underscoring the challenges women face in adopting this approach.

In his essay, Graham contrasted founder mode with manager mode, which he described as a strategy where companies hire capable individuals and trust them to perform their roles independently. However, he criticized manager mode for sometimes leading to ineffective leadership and company mismanagement.

Chesky, who co-founded Airbnb in 2008, mentioned that his interest in founder mode was influenced by figures like Jony Ive and Hiroki Asai, both formerly of Apple, and cited notable founders such as Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, and Elon Musk as exemplars of this management style.

READ MORE

[the-anem0ne]

Inside Out is a 2015 American animated coming-of-age film produced by Pixar Animation Studios for Walt Disney Pictures. It was directed by Pete Docter from a screenplay he co-wrote with Meg LeFauve and Josh Cooley. The film stars the voices of Amy Poehler, Phyllis Smith, Richard Kind, Bill Hader, Lewis Black, Mindy Kaling, Kaitlyn Dias, Diane Lane, and Kyle MacLachlan. Inside Out follows the inner workings of the mind of Riley, a young girl who adapts to her family's relocation as five personified emotions administer her thoughts and actions. Docter conceived Inside Out in October 2009 after observing changes in his daughter's personality as she grew older. The project was subsequently green-lit, and Docter and co-director Ronnie del Carmen developed the story, while consulting psychologists and neuroscientists in an effort to accurately portray the mind. Development took five and a half years on a budget of approximately $175 million. Significant changes to the film's story and characters delayed the film's production schedule.

Inside Out debuted at the 68th Cannes Film Festival on May 18, 2015, and was released in the United States on June 19. It received positive reviews from critics for its craftsmanship, screenplay, subject matter, plot, and vocal performances—particularly those of Poehler, Smith, Kind, Hader, Kaling, and Black. The National Board of Review and the American Film Institute named Inside Out one of the top-ten films of 2015. It grossed $858.8 million worldwide, finishing its theatrical run as the seventh-highest-grossing film of 2015. The film was nominated for two awards at the 88th Academy Awards, winning Best Animated Feature, and received numerous other accolades. Philosophical journal Film and Philosophy recognized Inside Out as one of the best animated films ever made. A sequel, Inside Out 2, was released on June 14, 2024.

I know it's you Dunny S.

[courseyoulovemeyoudontknowme]

Bedknobs and Broomsticks (1971, Robert Stevenson)

15/01/2024

Bedknobs and Broomsticks is a 1971 film directed by Robert Stevenson. The film, which stars Angela Lansbury and David Tomlinson, was produced in mixed media by Walt Disney Productions and is based on the novels The Magic Bedkno; or, How to Become a Witch in Ten Easy Lessons (1943) and Bonfires and Broomsticks (1947) by the British writer Mary Norton.

The British government displaces children in the countryside to protect them from the bombings that the Nazi air force inflicts on London.

When a letter arrives explaining that Miss Price will not be able to have the last lesson of the witchcraft course, the woman uses the brass knob to travel to London and meet the headmaster of the school, Mr. Emelius Browne. So they go to the Portobello Road market to look for the missing part of the book - The Spells of Astoroth - but a criminal forces them to make a deal; in particular she takes them to an old bookseller, an accomplice of hers, and it turns out that he is the one who has the missing part.

The film was started by Walt Disney and his collaborators before P. L. Travers, author of Mary Poppins, gave the green light for a film based on her children's novel. After the great success of Mary Poppins in 1964, Disney pushed to have Julie Andrews in the leading role again. In fact, in Bedknobs and Broomsticks similar magic, music and animated segments appear - moreover directed by the same director Robert Stevenson - and co-starring David Tomlinson, who brilliantly played the part of Mr. Banks. For fear of being identified with the same figure and therefore making a duplicate of the same genre, Andrews refused; a few months later she changed her mind, but Angela Lansbury had already signed on for the part of the protagonist Eglantine Price.

In the Naboombu lagoon scene, the song that Angela Lansbury and David Tomlinson sing was supposed to be used for Mary Poppins, in the Magic Compass episode that took Mary and the children around the world.

The footage for Step, however, was not relocated into the film because it was incomplete, but the new edition includes several newly discovered songs, including an Angela Lansbury solo, Nobody's Problems.

In reconstructing the film, Angela Lansbury, Roddy McDowell and other actors were asked to re-dub their parts on some spoken tracks that were not restorable. Even though David Tomlinson was alive when the film was reconstructed, it was not possible for him to provide post-synchronization for Emelius Browne: so another actor was called in whose intonations, in some cases, were criticized because they did not resemble those of the Tomlinson original.

When the film was screened for the Academy following its restoration, the crowd erupted in a standing ovation after the song Nobody's Problems was performed.

After the premiere (where it was shown in the 139 minute version) the film was cut to 117 minutes.

Songs like A Step In The Right Direction and With A Flair were removed entirely, as was the subplot featuring Roddy McDowall's character, the central dance number to "Portobello Road", cut by 6 minutes, and a solo by Angela Lansbury in Nobody's Problems.

In Italy Bedknobs and Broomsticks was shown at the cinema in October 1972, a year after its release in the United States.

In the 1981 version, in addition to being cut by about 20 minutes which corresponded to the songs The Home Old Guard, The Age of Not Believing and Eglantine, the film featured a different mix.

The DVD, however, brings to light the 117 minute Italian edition (which becomes 112 due to the speeding up of PAL) restoring the lost dubbing parts starting from a 16 mm.