PIXAR FIRED LGBT ACTIVISTS WHO WORKED ON INSIDE OUT 2 | Film Threat News
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- This just in! Chris Gore and Alan Ng report…
Inside Out 2 Was the Hit Pixar Needed, but the Laid-Off Employees Who Crunched on It Are Still Hurting
www.ign.com/ar...
Have a drink with us for Hollywood On the Rocks, Wednesdays at 1PM PT, then catch us on our Friday Livecast at 9AM PT for film reviews, interviews and a chance to join the conversation about movies and all things pop culture!
And on Mondays at 1PM PT, join us ringside for Versus, where a bunch of passionate movie nerds have themselves a Royal Rumble!
-----------------------------------------------------------
ALL THE LINKS!
linktr.ee/film...
T-SHIRTS AND MERCH! Shop Film Threat t-shirts, mugs, merch and more:
shop.filmthrea...
SUBMIT YOUR INDIE FILM! We’ll review anything including your indie movie! Submit your film for review now:
filmthreat.com...
WIN AWARDS! All films reviewed on Film Threat become eligible for our indie movie awards show Award This! You can even attend the party!
linktr.ee/awar...
JOIN US AS A MEMBER! Join the Film Threat channel to get access to perks including giveaways, member chats and exclusive videos:
/ @filmthreat
LOCALS
filmthreat.loc...
Follow Alan Ng
linktr.ee/mypalal
Follow Chris Gore
linktr.ee/that...
3 LIVESTREAMS WEEKLY
We are live three days a week! Join us on Mondays for VERSUS, Wednesdays for HOLLYWOOD ON THE ROCKS and Fridays for movie reviews on the FILM THREAT LIVECAST -- reviews, TV coverage, entertainment news, filmmaker interviews, debates -- join the conversation!
Subscribe and watch Film Threat on Rumble:
rumble.com/c/F...
#SupportIndieFilm #FilmThreat
-----------------------------------------------------------
SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/2vlR9zl
Film Threat on iTunes: apple.co/2LqWm1V
Film Threat on Soundcloud: bit.ly/2LqjSMk
Film Threat on Spotify: spoti.fi/2LBBjtM
ATTACK OF THE DOC!
Plus get Chris Gore’s Attack of the Doc! Ultimate Collector's Edition Blu-ray here:
shop.filmthrea...
Attack of the Doc! is streaming for free and on VOD, here are all the links:
linktr.ee/atta...
Produced by Chris Gore, Alan Ng, Laurie O. and Glenn Brown.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Get new movie reviews, interviews and news daily on our website.
filmthreat.com/
It could just be me, but the idea of making a 13-year-old gay to push an ideological agenda that is already under a lot of scrutiny when it comes to kids seems like a bit too much, especially for a family movie. The people who told them to cut it out did the right thing.
I think pushing this crap at any age should be banned. China has the right mind set of how to handle delusion. I doubt Disney fired them, I noticed once a year Disney has to put 1 movie through that makes money. All the others are pure sh** to be frank. I think if they don't make any money it would get suspicious how the company operates, I know BR money, but most people don't do their homework, nor understand what this company is trying to do. It's not entertainment, nor just pushing to one cause. Their target's aren't old people, nor adults with the mind dribble, it's the young. Starts there and then by college it ends. Most parent's don't understand that and let their kids be taught by this company instead of by the parents and it's sad to see.
And when it came out there was still rumbling that it was giving gay vibes, as Allen says. It still has DEI racial casting to a slightly absurd degree (white people are the minority... at a HOCKEY camp in Minnesota???).
would complain if it was straight couple and under age
“adult gay men tend to be attracted to very young, post-pubescent types.” - Joy Reid
@@bradyd.6332That would be PDF files, not adult gay men. No need to demonize an entire sexuality just because narcissistic elites are currently using them as a shield.
Speaking as a former business owner that had quite a few employees, never hire an “activist”. Only problems will follow.
More broadly, why should a person's sexuality even be a part of a movie for children?
Queer kids exist too?
All those stale animators that were forced out and abused are still hurting too. No one feels sorry for the Reddit hires.
The work place is no place for activist brats.
Imagine if, besides of having the Anxiety issue, the LGBT storyline. Gosh. The movie could be a complete narrative trainwreck.
Might as well toss in some ADHD and paranoid schizophrenia. The parents could be furry swingers with ever other adult figure in the kids life. Open at a pro-Palestinian march and have that repeat in the background through out. Maybe a news story on the tv stating Russia surrendered to Ukraine.
Guys, we need to remember that there was a short film on the DVD of the first film, called “Riley‘s First Date”. This was the film where a “boy” comes to pick her up. Why are they trying to retroactively make every character gay?
Depopulation agitprop.
Because Riley likes sports. That means lesbian. Just like they want to keep saying tomboy = trans. Any one that can shapeshift or transform = non binary. Stereotyping is only allowed on their side.
@@StratumPress No. It's partly because demographically showbiz has a much larger ratio of gays and therefore they want their work to reflect their outlook.
@@mos6507 both are elements, sure there are more.
@@mos6507but why now if that has been the case for a long time?
I honestly think this stuff shouldn't be in ANY children's programming! Not even the niche stuff....
Why not? Why can't you simply have two dads or two moms of one kid? You don't have to explain the sexual nature of it in the movie.
I’m a writer and I have had child characters with same sex parents. The parents are never sexualized and their relationship isn’t more sexual than anybody else, why is it a problem?
Agree 100%. Normalizing the idea of having 2 people of the same sex masquerading as parents is just disgusting and degenerate.
@@Willis_S whyyy? If they aren’t beating or touching on their kids they should be find. I was abused by straight people my entire life so any loving home is a good home to me.
There are few things more infuriating than hiding a lack of talent with activism. The idea of “fake it til you make it” doesn’t even apply because they seldom learn anything if they don’t get called out.
I bet even if they made small stuff targeted towards THAT audience that it still wouldn’t do very well. A vast majority do not want this crap, and they need to cut it out.
Why do they insist on making gay kids’ movies? They’re not having their own kids so they have to have yours.
It goes with the old adage: preferred pronouns lead to preferred pro-nonce.
Such a stupid comment.
They don't reproduce, they recruit.
@@chogall00 Aww, is the degenerate offended? Good. Evil cannot create. It can only corrupt and pervert.
Good for the activists- now they can be full time activists instead of pretending to be a animators or storytellers. FFS just let kids be kids without all the gender and sexuality undertones. If they made Stand By Me now, instead of the 4 boys being friends, they would look to sneak in kiss or try to portray the boys as being more than friends with sexual undertones.
Chris. Gay Disney anything does not need to exist in any form whatsoever FULL FUCKING STOP.
Why? Why can't you have two minor characters be gay?
@@Criner05 Because NO THANKS!
That's why.
Not needed. Can only hurt sales.
You can include all the gay garbage you want. I and many many other people who have had enough of it will not watch and will keep asking when will it be over? Sexuality is a personal issue, leave it there.
@@Criner05 You can, implicitly. Just not overtly. Not good for business. This simple fact - when being gay was fully accepted as an alternative lifestyle - kept Disney swimming in profits during the 90s.
@@Criner05 You can, but the public is done paying for it. We are tired of being lectured to, and any company that insists on doing it can go bankrupt.
I cannot understand a mindset that would look at thousands of years of human story-telling and proclaim the wide range of stories and characters available to them "homogeneous" merely because they failed to engage with LGBTQ+ theming. Or rather, I can understand a mindset that would _say_ such a thing, but I'm not sure there's an appropriate response other than "Either you're trying to apply pressure to get what you want, to the studio's detriment, or you possess no imagination. In either case, you don't belong here."
this is what happens when you ignore red flags and hire stupid, brainwashed people who are driven towards totalitarianism. these people have the most in common with... well... hitler. and that should be a red flag, right? i dont know a bigger one.
When you realize that is their entire metric of experimentation, it becomes no surprise how many modern stories are flat, narrative bankrupt, trash.
I am not really interested in digital animation, but this is wonderful news! I do hope that it is too little, too late for Bob Iger, who I have hated since he ruined Twin Peaks 33 years ago. The flood of cultural damage that he has caused to things that are important to me, cannot be undone. It is an unpopular notion, but it really is hate that I feel.
I still don't see how this movie made so much freaking money it stinks
Pixar hasn't made a good movie in over a decade.
It would have been a retcon anyway. Remember the imaginary boyfriend theme in Inside Out 1? Not that anyone cares about character continuity (think of how Sulu was "turned" gay in JJ Trek).
A girl/woman can have a boyfriend and not be straight.
They also turned Seven of Nine gay in new Trek. And new Punky Brewster turned Cherie gay. And the Rocko's Modern Life revival special made Ralph Bighead a transsexual. Queer retcons are the new thing.
Disney did not avert just "risk" with this movie.
They narrowly escaped an iceberg encounter.
In Nimona the only thing that frustrated me was the fact that the man ends up being gay. This thing about two men not just being able to be friends without being gay is infuriating. Luckily the movie was good enough to make up for it.
I'm really glad they didn't inject that into Inside Out 2. It was a great movie.
Put a ribeye on the menu in a vegan restaurant and when nobody orders it put some ribs and bacon burgers on the menu. Then stop offering salad.
Crazy? Tell a good story without an agenda?
There was no gay agenda in "Lightyear."
@@Criner05 Lightyear was "Gay Agenda: The Movie" (also "Critical Race Theory and Intersectional Feminism: The Movie" as well lol)
@@AnonymousNoNayme Did you see "Lightyear?"
I was *shocked* how little gay stuff was in it. Makes total sense that the studio had to clean it out and fire some activists to straighten the movie out
Consumers DO NOT want "gay" stories in children's movies (or star wars or marvel because that is NOT what attracts the audience for those movies, DUH) . This IS not what parents want for their children. Adults who can not write non-gay content for children need to find other places to peddle their "stories". Children are NOT sexual beings. They should not be propagandized they should be allowed to develop into the humans they are meant to be. The time to decide on your sexuality is when you are mature enough to make decisions that will affect your entire life. It's time to tell good stories not shove "the message" down the throats of people who are paying for your product. Also if you want to tell gay stories be right up front about it, you know honest, and be prepared for the audience that will see it. 5% of the audience maybe, so spend 5% of what you would have spent for a general audience.
@@deborahsoutar6308 recently I started watching the dragon Prince it's pretty awesome right until they start shoving the Queer garbage into it it's honestly repulsive
I've been saddened by this for ages. Representation is great, but what has really happened in mainstream media is they have killed friendship stories.
I’d argue that representation just creates division amongst groups. Now people will only watch things that “represent” them.
Representation is just re-branded 'Affirmative Action', which is based in discriminatory behaviour, it's literally the inversion of 'Representation'. Meritocracy reigns supreme always.
Who the fuck wants a black brain surgeon who was handed his credentials to give them a new kidney? How about the MOST qualified person get the job. Representation is a lie meant for closet-communists to fawn over. Shit does nothing for society.
That "gay" insertion in Lightyear is absolutely the reason none of my family were willing to watch it. The continued effort to find some other reason for the failure of that movie is, well, surprising 🤷♂️. When will they get past the 1st stage of rejection (denial) and move on to the 5th stage (acceptance)?😄
Since you never saw "LIghtyear" you obviously have no idea how much the two gay characters were in the movie, how gay they were, and how much messaging there was. Why can't a kids movie simply have two moms of a kid?
@@Criner05 because you don't reenforce the wrong behaviour.
@@DanyTV79 What's the wrong behavior?
@Criner05 With all due respect, if my family does not want to view a movie with content that we do not support, then why would we watch it to see if "just a little" is okay? No thanks means no thanks.
@@jefish2159 What exactly don't you support and why not?
I've never had any issue with gay people, but it doesn't mean I want to watch it.
You and most everyone else it seems
making the protagonist gay is not right for any children's film.
Soooo instead of focusing on her homosexuality, they told a real story instead? Good.
I knew I was on to something when I sensed something sus about the trailer and press junkets, just goes to show people who assumed it would be woke were half right since it was supposed to be until they changed their minds.
I have a hard time believing that the film made $1.6 billion in the box office. No one was talking about this movie. "Deadpool & Wolverine" did $1.3 billion. I can buy that. But "Inside Out 2"? I smell that the books are being cooked.
me too. especially since the movie was 'only ok'. it was basically identical to the first part. nothing was better or worse in it, in fact even the plot was identical - emotions get lost off-center and try to come back, while Riley... well... lives on.
I think the main reason it’s so profitable is because it appeals to kids. So parents are going to take them to see this movie. Another example would be Frozen 2 and it made over a billion and that movie was Lacklustre
yeah. and nobody was gonna watch Avatar 2 either. hehehe. ah that little bubble, doesn't cover the entire world, eh?
Probably being the only kids movie out ( as far as I know) at the time helped. Parents are starved for decent family movies
My parents work at an elementary school and they have not reported any children talking about this movie or having any merch from it. The kids still have backpacks, lunchboxes, and plushies of classic Pixar characters like original Buzz Light-year and Nemo. So I'm not sure this film made much of an impression on its target audience.
You know, I don't think they did a good job of it. I took my kids to see it in the theatre and I got lesbian vibes throughout and I'm pretty dense to that stuff. The moment they met that "big secret" character who wouldn't leave the vault, saying "not yet", I knew they were foreshadowing her sexuality for IO3.
Did you stay for the after-credits scene? They revealed what Riley's secret is, and that's not it.
It's because it's about female team sports so obviously the girls are gonna. be pretty butch.
Yeah, the Deep Dark Secret was just that she burned a hole into the rug. When Joy said she figured it was the time they peed in the pool, Dark Secret freaked out and went back in the vault.
@@sterling7 I didn’t. Ah, that’s good to know, thanks. I should add, like Chris, I don’t care if they made a lgbt movie provided it was marketed towards an appropriate age demographic.
If all of these seasoned, reasonable-minded, pale complexioned, Y chromosome having veterans of the animation industry were let go, why are we *NOT* seeing a surge of independent animation projects?
Money, I presume? Or lack thereof.
tired of these "Activists" Get gone.
Jelly donut sounds like an especially nasty euphemism for something that might happen at certain parties.
I won't allow my children to be subjected to homosexual entertainment. Where we live homosexuality is considered a negative thing, to say the least. As a matter of fact, I would go so far as to say it is considered a negative thing almost everywhere except in liberal western cities. Most people don't like it. Period.
You're pretty much on the money with the last statement. For example, when the US recognized gay "marriage" nationwide, most people were not in favor of it. It was activists in the court system overriding proper lawmaking, not people voting or the Constitution being amended, that got it pushed through.
Such a small little person that you are. Bigoted and proud. Chris and Nick, are these the kind of people you wanna attract?
@chogall00 I'm gay and fully understand that people who don't like that still have a right to exist and speak their mind. Trying to shame creators for not virtue signaling against them or banning them doesn't actually help gay people or change minds.
@@chogall00
So you don't want parents raising their kids according to their values? OP's opinion isn't hurting anyone or inciting violence, so why should you care? Who's the bigot here?
I believe that the new voice for Buzz was partly motivated by Tim Allen's personal politics.
I don't have a problem if Disney wants to put gay characters in an animation cartoon. But I agree with Chris, that it needs to be branded as a separate content. Perhaps make it PG13 and don't make it a continuation of one of their main stream Pixar series. I believe one of the big problems that all of Disney media platforms have been facing is they don't understand who their target audience is anymore. Or perhaps they do and when a content bombs, they blame the audience. So, when Disney intends to push content that is strongly LGBTQ and it doesn't do well on Disney + or theaters, they need to realize it was their creators that caused the product to fail.
It would be kind of random to make her gay since before part 2 she is shown to be straight.
I am enjoying this show more and more. And i'm learning a lot too. As an actor, I feel like I'm learning how to spot quality in a script.
It is not enough Jennifer Lee is the source of everything wrong in Disney animation. She must be fired alongside her minions not demoted from studio president to director still working at Disney.
You can’t go by the money you have to go by how many tickets sold. Inflation muddies the water on how much it made
They came really close to writing the Riley character as gay by the way she acted towards the hockey captain I’m guessing they did consider it.
When I saw the trailer, I thought that the big reveal would be that Riley had a crush on the hockey captain and would find out that they both had feelings for each other.
I think they were hinting at that. Which I have no problem with.
But I’m not sure how you could make a family-friendly movie which focuses in detail on the psychology of sexual attraction.
And I wouldn’t trust them not to turn it into a political screed.
The story about friendship and anxiety was a far better choice.
Hopefully bisexual as she likes boys aswell. I wouldn’t have minded that and seeing her like girls is refreshing.
Do not sexualize a character... unless is gay - Disney
Why would you make a film for 5 percent of anything??
If you strip away the specifics, none of this stuff is designed to benefit the audience. If it was then all the movies or TV shows that failed would have been successful. This stuff is designed to benefit the filmmaker’s agenda only, which why they get personal when the movie or TV show fails.
How many employees were fired to make way for these activists to take their place huh? Only to screw up badly. No sympathy from me.
jelly-doughnut metaphor ftw
It’s not “fine” especially when it’s minors! It is a problem, especially when there are minors in the audience! Skittle squad propaganda is NOT “good”!
srsly. how the fuck don't they get the "jelly doughnut" analogy?! rock the fuck on chris!
It’s crazy to hear they had to go out their way to make sure a platonic relationship between 13 year olds was not going to run the risk of being misconstrued by the audience of being sexual or lgbt. What a backwards time we live in.
It's like they never heard of tomboys before
Teens can have crushes. Pre-teens can have crushes. Most people you have a crush on never have sex with you.
@@smoothsketch it’s not even that (not that I disagree with you, you are correct). It’s that you just can’t have a movie about good friendships anymore without the woke trying to interpret it as some homoerotic fantasy, and it’s even more disgusting they do it with kids. It used to be you’d get movies about guys who survive combat together or struggle through difficult situations but because they had each other they pulled through. It’s no a sexual thing, it’s camaraderie like being a brother or sister if it’s two women. But if you try to remotely tell a story like that today, the audience has been almost conditioned to question “are they secretlygay?” Imagine if the Fellowship of the Ring was made today. I wouldn’t be shocked if many people cringed at Frodo and Sam’s bond, and equally wouldn’t be shocked if HollyWoke actually full on made itgay.
@@Criner05 everyone has gone through it, but you aren't crushing on everyone and everything. Most of your life is generally spent in platonic relationships unless you have a problem.
@@joncross9264 So why can't Riley crush on a girl but Violet can crush on a boy in "The Incredibles?"
Correct me if i'm wrong didn't Riley have a fantasy imagination about a cute boy that was later repeated by her mom and another character in the credits?
Money first. Fellings second.
Shhh! you're talking like a rational person!, you're not allowed that!,
One day the endless gobstopper of money will end, Charlie, and wankovision will fall swifter than the rise(similar to the "magic elevator")
Gotta disagree heavily with Chris on this one. If Disney made a “sparkles” kids channel it would turn me off them as a parent even more. I don’t want the risk of my kids accidentally clicking on that area thinking it looks shiny & discovering what’s in there. It’s my job to protect them & to me having this in any kids content is not ok. You can call me whatever you want but they are my kids & this is how it is
I like Chris but his takes on this are turning me off.
I'll be 54 next month. Grew up in the "70's. There are straight films, father son films, mother daughter films, etc. Multiple films that are not going to have wide appeal. I love small, thoughtful films. I loved The Bikeriders. A wide release, not a small-town suburbia film. Create the art you want. Make it for you, the people involved and know it's not going to be for everyone. Furthermore, let's get back to not caring about who it's not for. Make it. Just make it. I love your channel, gents!
That Disney Sparkle is actually an amazing idea. They get their own crap, and it doesn’t have to infest the mainstream. Same concept as Christian TV basically
What really pist me off about Lightyear was they literally had an older version of Buzz in the movie and they still couldn't bring themselves to cast Tim Allen as Old Buzz. Not that it would of made the film any better but they couldof at least got brownie points for sneaking him in there.
No, no, no, and no to even a subsidiary shipping gay entertainment. Disney's bread and butter is family, and families generally want to distance themselves from that. Even associating with it will continue to damage the brand. Not to be cruel, but most people don't want gay content. Sorry. That's just the way it is.
lmao "afraid of rocking the boat" is just funny when you realise hollwood is full of lgbtq movies.
"Disney Sparkle"? I've already vowed not to give Disney money because of this stuff. If they were to go that far, it only guarantees that I will keep to that vow until my dying breath. You don't push this stuff on children, period.
Are they shocked that they were fired for pushing for something that would cost the company millions of dollars?
I took my 6yo to see Inside Out 2. I heard anything i would be worried about but i spent the entire movie waiting for something inappropriate to happen. It wasn't a fun way to watch a movie. I went to the first one and didn't think about it, but then i also didn't take a kid to that one either.
it's still a pretty gay film. My 11 year old son also noted there are next to NO boys in the film. How's that for diversity and representation?
Disney chose business over the message because they needed a win... they know how to make money they just don't want to. Iger should be fired
Culture is healing
The problem is it's not jelly donuts it's brocolli
I remember when she meets her friend at the beginning of the movie. It was shot the way a meet cute would be in a rom com. They could have easily turned her idolization of the team captain into a crush. So glad they chose to keep the movie family friendly.
Somebody explain something for me .
I understand a pseudo artist from CalArts to don't know about the economics of a movie and just want to put propaganda on it .
What I don't understand is the leaders of disney , Bob Iger and all the other old straight while males that command the company, to permit that money to be wasted.
People dont like gay movies its that simple. They dont make money
Has Pixar ever made a non-gay movie? What was it called?
Brave (2012). That's the only one though.
They need to go.
I was exactly like the gay kid in Stranger Things except that I wasn’t gay
Until they do a few years of Message free movies will I believe it.
Good video. Thank for the hard work, fellas
Why is it always children? 🤔
Can't you just see the X-Twitter posts if Disney went through with operation "Sparkle?"
"Jim Crow went from the Dumbo movie to his own animation division."
"Disney's new animation division also comes with their own bathrooms, water fountains, and lunch counters."
Big news: Pixar makes a non gay children’s movie! Read all about it! One got by the gay goalies!
The last few years all I’ve heard is that theaters are dying, blockbusters are dead, etc, and now in 2024 there’s been several gigantic movies that actively lessen or ignore the obnoxious pandering that drove viewers away from entertainment so my hope is this is a trend. Being able to go to theaters and escape reality has been a wonderful treat.
Watched the movie with the wife and kids last night, were so glad they didn't go the route they could of. Of course the whole diversity of the characters from a practical perspective is annoying, if girls are playing hockey, the majority are going to be white, and you're sure as hell not going to have a girl with a burka who most likely is a particular religion, playing in a sport like Hockey. It was a good movie, but seeing that stuff is still incredibly annoying, just makes it more difficult to just not get distracted. I mean if you had a movie about cheerleaders or something and half of them were disabled, well, firstly it's probably be something like a parody movie if it existed, but secondly, the unreasonablness of the scenario would make the movie unwatchable.
Glad activist are out! They destroyed ‘wish’. As animator Disney lost me until final straw firing animators and getting activist.
But I had no problem Riley being bisexual liking ‘girls’ as I could relate. When I was 13 I liked girls (without knowing tbh) but saying it’s okay without pushing it in our faces. It’s still obvious that Riley likes her little bit more due to body language. Wouldn’t you think ‘envy’ would play more in the role idk.
Bisexual Riley could’ve been good. Bisexual exist in the world.
Glad activist are out! They destroyed ‘wish’. As animator Disney lost me until final straw firing animators and getting activist.
But I had no problem Riley being bisexual liking ‘girls’ as I could relate. When I was 13 I liked girls (without knowing tbh) but saying it’s okay without pushing it in our faces. It’s still obvious that Riley likes her little bit more due to body language. Wouldn’t you think ‘envy’ would play more in the role idk.
Bisexual Riley could’ve been good. Bisexual exist in the world.
I’m glad the movie just let Riley be a tomboy. Tomboys need representation too!! 😃👍
Schadenfreude towards these smug worries feels SOOOOO good! They have been calling the shots and destroying culture for years now. They blamed the 95% for the failures of them targeting the 5%.
I saw it and it was great
My ridiculous militant Lebanese cousin swears up and down that she IS gay because she wears a rainbow shirt in one scene.
I really resent how much the gay lobby has successfully stolen rainbows and made them a "gay" thing. Same with unicorns. Unicorns were long associated with longevity, virginity, and the incarnate Christ. Now they are code for "queer". I hate it. Also add words like "fabulous". I'm just waiting for a kid to look at Dark Side of the Moon and ask if it's a gay album.
To be fair, the original IGN article is not entirely talking about whether putting gay message into Inside Out2. It did revealed many unfair and difficult condition that Pixar artists dealing with, especially overworking/last minute changings/Dismiss employees after they ran out of usefulness, which is really really unfair and toxic. They won't go far in this kind of working environment with or without woke. Yes, Keeping Riley out of gay was a absolute right thing, but not everyone laid off due to they are woke activists, it never said that.
I would never have conceptualized Riley as being lesbian. What is wrong with these people?!
Get well soon Chris. We can almost make out what you're saying now. Every fifth word is almost audible.
Happy Birthday RMB
This disturbs me, not because of homophobia but it shows Disney learned nothing. We won’t be getting better movies, we’ll just get bad movies with straight characters.
I was from first second 100% percent sure that they will make mega giga gay Inside Out 2. Id put 1000$ on gender dysphoria kick in act 3 just like that, but sadly they come to reason :( At least I guessed right, Id actually pay to see that early gay version now!
Temps are almost NEVER kept after the game/video/whatever is released. Also, only people who have never had a job uses the term "crunch". Yeah, when a deadline is missed, people are asked to work harder. Woah, what a surprise. Pixar wanted people to finish the job they were hired to do. What monsters. *eyes rolled*
It’s really amazing that people have gone so “progressive” in modern stories, that my wife and I, who are too young to have grown up with it, are turning on shows like Little House on the Prairie and the Rifleman.
If I could be a father like Lucas McCain to my boys… that’s an idea I could hitch my wagon to.
I like some edgy stuff too, but you need a center that isn’t based on outliers.
The first Inside Out wasn't good at all and I don't understand ehy people like it. It's been so long since Pixar came out with a good film that they are completely irrelevant. I'm sure this film is terrible.
They're probably rewriting history here. They were putting in obvious gay coding, and studio said no. These people always lie.
I just want to confirm when Stephen Universe and the extremely gay She Ra Princesses of Power were around I don’t remember a problem. If you didn’t like it you didn’t watch and those shows were special because only a few shows had LGBTQ. Well written too surprisingly I watched both shows all the way through. I used to like gay shows. The problem as you say is with pushing. If 100% of shows have this people can’t just “if it’s not for you don’t watch it” and they’re going to start pushing back. A lot of this has nothing to do with gay people and everything to do with allies and activists those people are annoying.
Lightyear had no appeal to me, but even if it did, the politics around it turned me off. I didn't even know about the gay kiss.
It definitely could have been Disentry's "50 shades of Gay" if the wokebotalots had their way.
For those at Pixar, who “can’t do this anymore” there are plenty of people waiting to take their jobs.
I dont eat jelly donuts. But i don't mind if once in a while there is a jelly donut on buffet. Its good for variation and the ppl who like jelly donuts. But mý problem is that there are jelly donuts on every table these days. While only 3% likes them. Why would i sit down at a 10th table full with jelly donuts, while there are other tables wich have my kind of food. And the thing that upsets me is that i even get called an '--- ist - plenty of times for choosing not to sit at the jelly donut table. Thats just mean bully behavior of the 3% that dó like jelly donuts
The last few years of LGBT - dare I say spamming - in entertainment is not about activism. It is not about the community or advancing acceptance. It is not even about what so many I see posting comments based on their own religious beliefs or sexual mores - i.e. it is not about "grooming" or whatever word you want to put on it.
This stuff is about Hollywood types - mostly all straight - creating stuff with cardboard tokenism in it so they can check off a checkbox and pat each other on the back for how virtuous they are in their parties. This stuff is about them and these films are the equivalent of their social media posts on whatever forum you wish. It is about being seen by their echo chamber. The fact that this actually damages the very people they say they are advocating for - and the polls show this to be true even among the most young people - be damned. This is not about those people. It is about their audience - and it is clear their audience is their cocktail and drinking party circles. It is about social status within their straight Hollywood groups who gain status by such things as having trans kids.
Chris - the audience for this stuff is not 5% - it is .0000001 percent - the small groups of Hollywood types that they interact with.
When they make huge amounts of money, the staff often get bonuses. When they fire people at around the same time as the movie released, then they have fewer people to give bonuses to. The people who worked their asses off to make the movie and immediately got fired have every right to feel pissed off that they put that much effort into something and got fired as soon as it was finished. So while I'm grateful the movie was made for the wider audience, those people who worked their butts off deserve at least a big last cheque as a thank you for all their hard work.