They're probably just having a really hard day and I am putting out a movie.

And this interview was meant to do the exact opposite and it was clearly meant to help Rachel Ziegler and save the dying Snow White remake as she came in with a completely new attitude, a new cadence of speaking,

and was saying basically the opposite of everything she had already said just a few months ago.

The cartoon was made 85 years ago, and therefore, it's extremely dated when it comes to the ideas of women being in roles of power.

Several months later.

The cartoon is so beloved. It's like a monumental moment in film history.

It was like the first feature-length cartoon movie to the point where it won honorary Oscars and all of these amazing things that happened for that film are the reason that you and I really get to sit here today.

It's actually... - Of course, it happened.

I think this is a reflection of how like... - Oh my God.

However, it's clearly failed and it's only added more fuel to the fire at a very bad time as one of Disney's major investors, Nelson Peltz is back on the move again,

trying to secure a board seat for him and another investor who isn't quite happy with the way that Disney's been going about their recent projects and the way in which they continue to lose money with almost every film.

And I personally think that someone like Nelson Pelz would be perfect for a board seat as Disney clearly needs some other voices and voices that will challenge their original opinion,

because they clearly have too many people on the board right now that all agree with each other, all agree with Bob Iger and because they're not getting any outside voices, because they're not having any conflict of opinion,

and they're not challenging their own stances enough, they're just following down the same path that's clearly failing with every single film

And they clearly need to make some serious changes, but it's very hard to actually make a change at a corporate level if everyone on the board already agrees with the decisions you've been making and you're not getting any other opinion.

And this lack of opinion, like I said, has resulted in Disney losing over a billion dollars in box office profits and that's purely down to them not making enough changes, or as Nelson Peltz would put it, "putting profits above the message."

And regardless (of) what your opinions are on Disney, I'm sure everyone can agree that something needs to change because they are losing too much money and driving away so many families and driving away their core audience base.

And so regardless if you actually agree with their political stances or you agree with their messaging within their movies, clearly, something's wrong.

Clearly, they need to make a change because at the core of Disney, they need to make a profit.

Because there's no point in being a movie studio, if you're not going to make profits with every film that you put out.

So like I said, even if you do agree with their message, you can clearly see that there is a disconnect between Disney and the audience.

You can clearly see that there are numerous problems at Disney and that they need to make a drastic change.

Otherwise, they're not going to be able to make profits moving forward.

And that's where we get back to the Rachel Ziegler situation where she is more of a symptom of Disney's downfall and not necessarily the catalyst,

because at the end of the day, she is just another young actor who suddenly got famous and was gifted a huge amount of money from Disney to play a huge famous character like Snow White.

And while she said many things that rightfully angered fans and rightfully drove away the core audience base of Disney,

I mean, you know, the, the original cartoon came out in 1937 and very evidently so, there is a big focus on her love story, with a guy who literally stalks her. Weird, weird.

So we didn't do that this time.

She was just buying into Disney's culture at that time.

We were just discussing ideas of what to do with the new Prince Eric movie.

Put a tick in it, make her gay.

And I don't think it would be hard to believe that Disney were probably feeding her a bunch of lines that they wanted her to say as Bob Iger admitted himself that the company was trying to predict the social climate of the time,

and they were trying to predict in the future how audiences would think politically.

And we all know that that's a huge problem because they took their focus off creating the best story possible and was just focused on trying to predict a social climate.

You are so Dumb. You are really dumb, for really.

Which clearly resulted in someone like Rachel Ziegler coming along because if it wasn't Rachel Ziegler, it would have been another actress who just bought into the company culture, bought into the messages that they wanted to push,

and didn't realize that the best way to advertise a movie is through positivity, it's through talking about the story and not making it all about the politics.

Because even if you agree with the political message of a film, if the story isn't good, if the cinematography isn't good, then the movie isn't good.

Because movies aren't defined by their political stance or their message, movies are defined by the quality of the filmmaking.

And that's exactly why you need alternative voices at the board because even though Bob Iger said this.

Is that creators lost sight of what their number one objective needed to be: Entertained.

And if you can infuse it with positive messages that have a good impact on the world, fantastic, but that should not be the objective. It's not about messages.

And I've worked hard since I've been back and reminding the creative community who are our partners, in that case, our employees that that's the objective.

And I don't really want to tolerate the opposite.

He needs people that can actually hold him accountable to that.

Because clearly when he came back a year ago, he had the same intention, but because he clearly wasn't held accountable to that intention, he still went ahead with projects that definitely went against putting entertainment first.

And even when you look at some of the projects that have flopped the worst for Disney and received the worst audience reaction, most of those projects were actually green-lit by Bob Iger himself.

So while he has done some good at the company, he did obviously lead Disney to making billions at the box office through their peak period from 2010 to 2020.

He has made some mistakes and I think a lot of that comes down to him hearing from the same voices and not hearing other opinions.

And aside from Bob Iger, aside from Disney, and aside from the storytelling, the investors at Disney need someone like Nelson Peltz on the board as well because they've actually tried to sue Disney in the past because Disney weren't making as much profits as they would have liked and did Disney were reportedly fabricating their profits from Disney+ and giving false numbers to investors.

So clearly, they're disgruntled, clearly they're angry with the sheer lack of success that Disney's been having.

And so I'm sure many investors would want someone like Nelson Peltz on the board who actually has a huge stake in the company and only wants the company to do well because he owns almost $3 billion of it.

And it's been reported that a lot of these board members right now don't have any stake in Disney.

They have no reason to actually want them to make a huge amount of profit.

And so that's not driving a lot of their decisions and sometimes when it comes down to it, you just need to focus on getting back to being successful with your movies and the best way to do that is through entertaining first and worrying about messages later.

But what are your thoughts on this situation?

Let me know down below in the comments.

If you like the video, please hit the like button, hit the subscribe button and I'll see you all on my next video.