5
OPINION

Thursday, August 8, 2019
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com OPINION

AKAASH TUMULURI | COLUMN

D

isney just broke (its 
own) record for annu-
al box office earnings 
with five months still to go in 
2019. The number? $7.67 billion. 
That’s on track for $13.15 billion 
by the end of the year, which 
would almost double the $7.61 
billion record they set in 2016. 
Disney’s direct production stu-
dio, Buena Vista, has captured 
38 percent of the market share 
so far this year, and that doesn’t 
even include the earnings from 
recent acquisitions like 21st 
Century Fox (home of “Dark 
Phoenix,” “Bohemian Rhapso-
dy”) and multi-studio produc-
tions like “Spiderman: Far From 
Home.” But even excluding 
those, Disney’s slate this year 
has been ludicrous: “Avengers: 
Endgame,” “Aladdin” and “The 
Lion King” have all grossed over 
$1 billion each.
With “Frozen 2” and the 
“Star Wars” finale waiting in 
the wings to close out the year, 
the house of mouse should find 
themselves even more comfort-
able after a profitable 2019. But 
do you notice something about 
all these movies? They’re either 
part of — or ending — an exist-
ing franchise or a remake. So, 
is the industry slowly becom-
ing a vacuum for originality? Or 
is Disney, in its role as market-
maker, leading the industry 
away from what Walt himself 
used to embody: creativity and 
innovation?
Obviously, this is an exag-
geration. There are still origi-
nal movies. This past weekend, 
Quentin 
Tanrantino’s 
“Once 
Upon a Time … In Hollywood” 
rewrote history, and Jordan 
Peele stripped away the comfort 
of seeing our own reflection with 
“Us” earlier this year. But both 
of those movies were greenlit, 
for the most part, because both 
directors have track records of 
success. That’s really all Dis-
ney wants: proven capability in 
the market. Few truly original 
scripts are even produced for 
the silver screen these days, a 
symptom of streaming com-
panies like Netflix, Hulu and 
Amazon buying and turning 
those ideas into longer-form, 
binge-worthy content that can 
be re-signed for a second season 
if successful. In short, they turn 
those ideas into TV. 
Movies have followed suit. 
Instead of “Toy Story: Season 

4”, we get “Toy Story 4.” We get 
a spit-shined “The Lion King” 
remake with diversity to some-
what rectify the vanilla original 
cast of a movie set in Africa. But 
it’s not just Disney. Lionsgate’s 
biggest movie this year is “John 
Wick: Chapter 3.” Sony’s biggest 
movie this year is “Spider-Man: 
Far From Home” (which was 
still made in conjunction with 
Marvel, owned by Disney). Uni-
versal’s biggest movie is about 
to be, barring a catastrophic 
fluke, “Fast & Furious Presents: 
Hobbs & Shaw.” Their current 
worldwide biggie is “How to 
Train Your Dragon: The Hid-
den World,” which is intellec-
tual property from an acquired 
company (DreamWorks Anima-
tion). Warner’s biggest movie 
will most likely be “It Chapter 
Two,” and Paramount’s biggest 
is likely to be “Terminator: Dark 
Fate,” per Scott Mendelson of 
Forbes.

So, it’s tough to say that 
Disney has caused this prolif-
eration of recycled intellec-
tual property. Moviegoers in a 
content-saturated, streaming-
dominated market want to have 
some security in their invest-
ment, especially when they 
could’ve just stayed at home 
and watched something else on 
their streaming app of choice. 
“Going to the movies” just isn’t 
necessary anymore. The pub-
lic now requires the movie to 
be “an event” to even show up. 
“Avengers,” “The Lion King,” 
“Star Wars”: we go to those 
movies for the community pres-
ence, the experience of shared 
fandom and the nostalgia of 
growing with characters. And 
that is why Disney owns the box 
office — they own nostalgia. 
Millennials who grew up on the 
Disney animated features of the 
’90s are having their own chil-
dren, and Disney is hoping to 
influence them also, continuing 

the cycle of recycled nostalgia.
The one good part about 
remaking movies is the oppor-
tunity to fix their original mis-
takes. Disney, in particular, 
has made a conscious effort to 
rectify the diversity issues that 
have plagued Hollywood, with 
“Black 
Panther,” 
“Aladdin” 
and “The Lion King” featuring 
diverse casts, the remake of “A 
Little Mermaid” featuring an 
African American Ariel, and 
“Captain Marvel” showing off 
a strong female lead. That is 
the most valuable asset of the 
Disney “entertaimpire”: the 
ability to introduce diversity 
and still make money.
Movies like “If Beale Street 
Could Talk,” “BlacKkKlans-
man” and “Moonlight,” while 
highlighting stories less told 
and 
winning 
Oscars, 
will 
never net anywhere near the 
amount any Marvel movie 
will — so Marvel can afford, 
and is given the freedom, to 
franchise a movie with an all-
Black cast; the “suits” of enter-
tainment can still expect to 
make back their investments 
with “Black Panther 2.” But 
nowhere in the future will we 
be seeing a “BlacKkKlansman 
2,” so we need to see diversity 
wherever we can, even if it is 
under a superhero costume 
or princess makeup. It is also 
why those voices of diversity 
are starting to be heard louder 
on TV and streaming media. 
Shows like “Atlanta,” “Inse-
cure,” “Master of None” and 
“Ramy” are winning Emmys 
and slaying ratings, because 
money is made differently and 
audiences 
want 
something 
different in TV than in tradi-
tional films.
So, until Disney runs out 
of iterations of its own ideas, 
it seems like we’re due for 
a slate of stories that we’ve 
heard before, at least on the 
big screen. And with Dis-
ney+ launching in 2020, don’t 
expect the king of entertain-
ment to give up its crown any-
time soon. If you’re looking 
for something new, something 
authentic or something that’s 
plain different, look on your 
phone. You’re more likely to 
find it there than anywhere 
else.

Disney’s monopoly on nostalgia

Akaash Tumuluri can be reached at 

tumula@umich.edu.

I

t’s been a pretty hectic sum-
mer. Twenty Democrats have 
debated each other on stage 
twice in the lead up to what might 
be America’s most important elec-
tion. The nation has seen divisive 
language coming to a nasty head. 
And Hannah B. ended her season of 
“The Bachelorette” by picking lying 
Jed, who she later dumped, instead 
of picture-perfect Tyler. America has 
been through a lot.
I’ve spent this summer trying to 
make sense of it all in the best way I 
know how — finding a center in pop 
culture. Pop culture is often mocked, 
the people who follow it ridiculed. 
If you can name every “Real House-
wife” or every song on today’s Top 40, 
you’re viewed as less intelligent and 
less in touch with important societal 
events. I’ve found the very opposite to 
be true. 
The status of a society is often 
reflected in its culture. I don’t think 
anything speaks more to the major-
ity’s rejection of Trump than the fact 
that a country/rap song by a gay Black 
man is now the longest running Bill-
board No. 1 ever. Today’s pop culture 
looks a lot different from the media 
and music of 10 years ago. There are 
teenage gay couples on Disney, super-
heroes that little girls can become 
and an overall rise in the representa-
tion of people of color on TV. While 
there is still a long way to go before 
our media truly represents the lives 
and faces of the American people, the 
change in who we watch on TV or 
listen to on Spotify is reflected in our 
government. Of the top five Demo-
cratic presidential candidates, two 
are women and one — Senator Kamala 
Harris — is a Black woman who is the 
daughter of immigrants. Another top 
five candidate is an openly gay man. 
Public conversation on progressive 
policies are being driven by a young 
Latina woman. Politics is moving into 
the direction of true representation — 
but pop culture did it first.
Pop culture has seen female presi-
dents, a feat our own country has yet 
to achieve. Pop culture put a com-
mitted gay couple on screen six years 
before their marriage would be legal. 
From “Orange is the New Black” to 
“Hamilton,” pop culture has released 
visions and ideas into the world that 
one would not see if they merely read 
the first two pages of The New York 
Times without flipping to section C.
This isn’t a new development. 
Mass media and culture has long 
been seen as a liberal realm, one that 
will show the controversial material, 
albeit if for ratings, and get a conver-
sation started. Pop culture is where 

kids turn when they want to find ideas 
different than those spoiled by their 
parents, to discover if they disagree 
or not. So why should it be such a bad 
thing to turn to? Representation is 
important on so many levels. For the 
people being represented, it allows 
them to actually feel recognized, to 
see that their story is worth telling. On 
the other hand, it teaches those who 
may have grown up in a bubble and 
who were never exposed to stories 
other than those similar to their own. 
The face of the government doesn’t 
change unless the people want it to, 
and the people won’t want it to change 
unless they are accustomed to and 
accepting of a diversity that reflects 
the United States. Pop culture and 
media are great ways to provide such 
exposure. Yes, people will get angry, 
but society has slowly shifted towards 
broader representation, and what we 
see in media now is a lot different than 
what was shown fifty years ago.
This isn’t to say pop culture is the 
end all, be all of representation or 
progress. Pop culture still has plenty 
of issues with its portrayal of body 
image, race, gender, etc. I don’t believe 
pop culture is healthy when it is the 
center of your life, the sun around 
which you orbit. But being completely 
blind to it or scoffing at the notion of 
caring about it is lazy and pretentious. 
Politics, especially now, have just as 
much drama, ridiculous figures and 
toxic traits as an MTV reality show. 
It is in the harmony between these 
two toxic, exhausting industries that 
we find reason, and maybe a sliver of 
sense in this senseless world. 
If you spend every morning listen-
ing to The Daily podcast, then NPR 
News Now, then throw in a couple 
episodes of Lovett or Leave It, that’s 
great. But your worldview is more 
limited than you may think, and a 
huge problem with politics is the 
exclusivity associated with it by those 
who dedicate their lives to it. If you’re 
on the other end, and can list the past 
10 winners of Best Picture faster than 
the best 10 presidents, impressive. But 
the exclusivity of politics lives in part 
because few people make an effort 
to break it down. It may be silly to 
compare pop culture to politics, some 
may say it’s like comparing apples to 
oranges. But with a reality TV star as 
president and Broadway plays about 
former presidents, we have moved far 
past the blurring of the lines. It’s time 
to accept it, instead of reject it — you 
might be surprised by the things you 
learn.

In pop culture we trust

SAMANTHA DELLA FERA | COLUMN

Samantha Della Fera can be reached at 

samdf@umich.edu.

Is the industry 
slowly becoming 
a vacuum for 
originality?

