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?