Curate, connect, and discover
I agree 100 percent with you on this.
There's this issue with fans of any media complain about the lack of original works over actually watching them.
So, recently, D23 announced a ton of upcoming projects for the parks, games, shows, etc with their movies being the one that got the most attention. Majority of them are sequels and live action remakes and per usual, people are outrage over the big D for prioritizing on nostalgia baiting than making new ideas.
Here's the thing tho, alongside the sequels and live action remakes, they also announced Hoppers, an upcoming original film by Pixar directed by the guy that made We Bare Bears, Daniel Chong. Response to Hoppers, was near nonexistent. Like, very little anticipation as in "it exists".
Not only that, another original film before Hoppers is currently to be released next year, Elio. Just like with Hoppers, Elio only seen as this movie that was originally supposed to be released this year before swapping places with Inside Out 2.
Now, the obvious answer to this is rage culture. Being angry over the current thing is an easy content mill. Mufasa is being blasted because it had the audacity to not be faithful to an obscure prequel book series and Snow White for even much more dumb reasons, mostly centering on the lead actress because, if that didn't work on Halle, might as well try again on Rachel.
And when other people addressed that Pixar and Disney did made original films with Elemental and Wish being their current examples, the response these grifters is "We want GOOD original ideas." Now that just shows that they genuinely don't actually care about wanting to watch original ideas, regardless of quality, and simply only using them as a point to why hollywood is dead, blah blah blah.
Original ideas take time to get people invested into watching them. People prefer to engage with media they are more familiar with over the new ones, hence why they are always needlessly comparing things.
Elemental was mocked for being a Zootopia clone but with living elements and themes of racism, but while Zootopia is about general prejudice, Elemental is about personal prejudice. It doesn't use allegories like Zootopia, it's straightforward about the characters being immigrants. Just like any other Pixar film, there's more to the story than the general concept. But that didn't stop people saying that the characters being living elements didn't contribute to the story. Just like with Turning Red, the creator chose so because he want to, as if kids totally wanna watch a movie about immigrants. It's his story, based on his own life experiences told through a lens so kids can enjoy it.
I already talked about Wish to death, but it is a major factor considering that it's an original story that is deliberately made to be an homage to classical and renaissance era Disney films. The comparisons of to to previous films like Disney's more well known works like Snow White are dubious because they're oddly biased and surface level when there's another Disney film that's even more comparable, The Princess and the Frog.
Princess and the Frog is a lot like Wish, black lead, classical villain, hand drawn animation (though Wish's is stylized) and themes about working hard to achieve your dreams. While Wish has problems about how "half cooked" it is, Princess and the Frog has more problems than Wish; Tiana, their first black princess being a frog for majority of the movie, the sugarcoating of a 1920's setting, the demonization of an active closed religion that people use as an aesthetic coughAlastorHazbincough and a complicated story about technicalities to break the spell and a forced moral about love and family, and not in a good way.
Despite these issues being present and are still discussed today, the fact that it's hand drawn animated and has a cool looking villain wallpapers all over this issues. This is also extends in a lot of Disney's other older films. The mess of a cultural mix setting that is in Aladdin and Raya, the racism in Peter Pan, the usage of g*psy in Hunchback, Pocahontas existing and characters of color being played by white actors that the same thing literally happened with Raya (SEAsian characters, not SEAsian actors). Even though these problems have always been present, people dismiss them with "It was fair for the day". They value their personal nostalgia over the issues other have during them.
Coming back on the topic of comparing films, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish is often brought up to compare anything Disney and Pixar make. People had low expectations towards The Last Wish because it was a sequel to a spin off no one asked for and it succeeded their expectations. The reason why I brought up The Last Wish is because a minority of animation fandom use it as the standard for animated films. The comment saying "We want GOOD originals" is practically them moving up the goal post because to them, any original idea isn't good enough for their tastes. We can't have an original idea without someone bemoaning about how it's inferior to an already existing idea based on surface level comparisons.
Bringing back Wish because it's a good example, people wanted it be like the previous Disney films. However, being like them means loosing its own identity. Turning Star into a generic pretty boy for the girls to salivate over means losing what Star represents, the hope people have to keep on pursuing their ambitions.
An ironic thing is whenever they find a good idea they liked, they want more of it. Basically, wanting others to be just like it. What's the point of wanting an original when all you just want is the same old thing again?