Warwick Davis didn’t take too kindly to Disney+ removing Willow series
Mr. Davis wonders what he should tell subscribers when they want to watch the series
Aux News Willow
Earlier this year, Willow, Disney+’s pricy sequel series to Ron Howard’s 1988 fantasy film, became one of the 50 unlucky titles removed from Disney+ months after release. The decision inspired an array of takes, such as creator Jonathan Kasdan’s confusing admission that he’s “kinda into” making the show harder to see. The rest of us, however, weren’t so impressed. In fact, one Willow star, perhaps the most important Willow star, found the decision “#embarrassing.”
Over the weekend, Warwick Davis, who plays the titular sorcerer in the film and series, tweeted about the awkward position the Mouse House put him in. “I meet lovely people on a daily basis who are fans of Willow, who are the reason the Disney+ series was made,” Davis tweeted (or X’d, or whatever you want to call it—as long as you call us “Ray,” “J,” or “Ray J”). “Please tell me [Walt Disney Company], what do I say to these subscribers when they ask why they can’t watch the series any more? #embarrassing.”
As of this reporting, the Walt Disney Company has yet to reply to Davis. Not even with a sweating smiley face emoji. Moreover, why are we putting a true blue legend like Davis through this? The world may never know.
Like every other studio that foolishly stumbled into the streaming business 10 years late, only to find, yup, no money there, Disney spent $30 billion building Disney+’s offerings with original works, with the highest profile releases being stabs at I.P. extension—Star Wars shows, Marvel shows, Turner And Hooch shows. Still, less than a year after Willow and fellow sequel series Mighty Ducks: Game Changers were released, Disney scaled back its offerings to secure the ever-elusive tax write-down. Of course, the removal of these titles didn’t come with a physical release or a platform change, taking these titles out of circulation indefinitely, which is what Kasdan was “kinda into.” For the rest of us, those who probably don’t have episodes of Willow on our hard drives, we’re left with a Willow-less world where only the original movie survives. Maybe, one day, the Willow series can take its spot on the Island of Misfit Streaming shows: The Roku Channel.
106 Comments
Like I’m not saying that if I had two hundred million dollars or whatever that’s the show I would make, but it was kinda fun. I thought Ruby Cruz was quite good.
Yeah. Willow was fun to watch, which is something a lot of shows can’t say, and I wish they’d made more. Unfortunately it was a victim of the screeching “Go woke go broke” twits who attacked every positive review and comment because it committed the crime of having multiple female leads. Pity. I rewatched it in a marathon right before they yanked it, and it was even better the second time through.
I really liked the trippy atmospheric bits, especially that penultimate episode where they’re traveling across the Shattered Sea.
It was indeed a fun show that ended up square in the crosshairs of reactionary morons who were whining about it feeling like a WB show for teens and expected it to be Game of Thrones… would be interesting to sit these people down and have them watch the original, with its silly voices and poop jokes and talking animals and was a very serious movie that only grown ups could enjoy.MRAsHomophobesRacistsAll of the above
There are a lot of us who were just highly disappointed by the whole thing because it totally failed to recapture the spirit of the movie.
Though it honestly did highlight the fact that Val Kilmer entirely made the movie, without him the property just isn’t as good. It’s really telling that one of the best parts of the series is when Christian Slater recaptures a bit of Kilmer’s manic energy.
You sound like a rational person who genuinely just didn’t like it, which is fine. I was remarking more on the rabid fanatics who really lost their marbles over shit like having women in lead/warrior roles and having same-sex relationships and all that.
I don’t think there were a lot of those people. Like, if they got upset over having women in lead/warrior roles then they were probably just being general assholes and weren’t actually fans of the original movie. They were just the loud people, pretty much everyone who didn’t like it that I saw and talked to had the same opinion as I do.
I saw a lot of the most toxic voices in the fan spaces I frequent railing against the show, including a lot of “go woke go broke” chortling when it was cancelled. None of that takes away from valid criticism or personal taste.
Oh I did too but it was like one out of those posts out of every 10 posts talking about the show, and from the usual jackasses that are easily ignored and mostly downvoted.
Why you hanging out in those fan spaces?
I don’t anymore but for a while I was heavily active in a Facebook group for Old School Rules (OSR) D&D. It was mostly white guys my age or slightly older whining about shit or looking for excuses to post pictures of women in bikini chainmail.I enjoyed riling them up but have since quit Facebook.
I felt like the series really exposed how thin the original movie is. When I saw Willow as a kid, I hadn’t even heard of Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones didn’t exist yet, so I went in with a child’s expectations. But this series was obviously made for middle-aged nerds who have since experienced those things.Willow may be lighter in tone, but it’s also lacking any kind of depth or mystery surrounding its fantasy setting. It’s pretty clearly lazy-Tolkien and the more you learn about the setting, the less you want to know, which is the opposite of how this stuff is supposed to work.
The Willow D+ series reminded me of how the old Ghostbusters cartoon repeatedly referred to Egon’s “collection of spores, molds and fungus” because that one throwaway line is the only backstory we ever get for Egon in the movies. They had to keep recycling stuff from the mostly forgotten original movie, because there wasn’t a lot of there there aside from Kilmer’s mugging. And Kilmer wasn’t even available to do some more mugging.
Spot on. I enjoyed the series as a fun fantasy romp and was always bewildered to see people hyping up the original as this big epic story with deep lore and whatnot. Sure, I have fond memories of it, too, but I rewatched it before the series came out and it was very much a silly fantasy flick with a ton of humour that was typical of its time – just like the show is a silly fantasy show with a ton of humour that is now typical of our time. So I think in that regard they absolutely nailed the assignment.And by all means, if that sort of flavour isn’t everyone’s taste then so be it. But it’s absolutely disingenuous to complain the show isn’t more like GoT when the film it was based on never was GoT either. The fantasy genre is big enough that there’s room for silly fun romps, too.
That is a twisted view of what happened. I loved the original Willow movie and did not like the series. It was woke, and not because of the female leads. It seemed the characters were just modern teens thrown into the setting. Their dialog, the characters, everything about it was poorly done and lacked the magic of the movie. After looking forward to the series since it was announced, I was completely let down by it.
It was woke, and not because of the female leads. It seemed the
characters were just modern teens thrown into the setting. Their dialog,
the characters, everything about it was poorly done and lacked the
magic of the movie.
Ummmmm…What do you think “woke” means?
Agreed. It started out pretty weak and I felt all the characters were shrill and one-note (Willow most of all) but as the series went on, the writing got better, the characters deepened, and the chemistry of the charismatic cast increased. By the end, I was really won over.
Plus, on a personal level, while I liked the Dungeons and Dragons movie, the Willow series was a far better representation of what D&D was like. The party was a nice mix of fighters and spell casters and everybody contributed to fighting encounters. I could easily see this as a pretty fun campaign.
Slow news day?
“Too slow.” – Ray Greene
The A.V. Club
No kidding. An entire story written around one single tweet.
Yeah, well, a lot of us didn’t take too kindly to how much it sucked.
Glad I checked before I posted the same thing. Woof that was a stinker. It looked like a second season may have been better, but don’t give me a whole prolog season of boring nonsense and badly lit fights.
It was hubris. I’ve noticed a lot of shows like this are written assuming they’ll get 3+ seasons, so the first is absurdly glacial and inert. They’re stretching out mediocre material, assuming brand recognition = loyalty, and refusing to get to the damn fireworks factory.Still, though, Davis’ complaint is kinda valid…well-received or no, pulling new content like this feels shitty. The season already exists, so pulling it to save pennies at the expense of everyone who made it probably feels pretty disrespectful.
I like it when a series is written to tell its story in a few seasons, like 12 Monkeys, but the first season has to actually be good, not just setup for stuff that looks like it will be good down the road.
Yeah, you gotta be like the premier of Breaking Bad. That made me go “Fuck YES! I’m watching every second of this!”
Hell yeah, it was propulsive and understood it had to earn the viewer’s investment. Any original show has to make a case for itself. But shows based on IP you already know can get so lazy…I think a lot of Disney+ series are like this.Secret Invasion or Book of Boba Fett seemed especially phoned-in…just because it’s Marvel or Star Wars doesn’t entitle anyone to anything. Willow was a chore, I stuck with it because I love when Warwick Davis gets to look like a guy and not a prosthetic monster. But it’s wild that the best modern show featuring Elora Danan isn’t this one (it’s Reservation Dogs.)
Yeah, it’s pretty obvious that Disney paid all that money (which I understand they have made back) with the assumption that “Well it’s STAR WARS! These idiots will pony up for anything!”
idk that I’d call Boba Fett phoned in, it seemed to be going for a specific tone that it seemed to nail.But then I tend to wait and binge, so maybe it dragged more when watching week-to-week.
I’ve been saying this for years now, show runners need to start having every season written like it’s the last. Especially for streaming shows. Maybe in a couple of years when it’s clear it’s sticking around they can start doing cliffhangers, but be prepared to leave fans with something satisfying they’ll be happy to rewatch in case it does get cancelled.
Yes… Ha ha ha… yes!
“Hey, kids, remember the fantasy fun you had with the movie? All the costumes, and the epic score, and the sense of immersion into a fantasy world? Yeah? YEAH?! Great!“Here’s Willow in a jean jacket, and some ladies in, like, I dunno, some hats you can get at Walmart. Enjoy the rock music.”
The real question is when will “Leprechaun: Back 2 tha Hood 3″ see the light of day?
Um, 2003?
Ah, the wonderful time of having your entertainment and probably all other choices decided entirely by what serves the most wealthy of civilization’s whims and foibles.Rather than placing them all against the wall, however, we could place new rules that both guarantee proper tax payments from the massively wealthy and increased social/governmental oversight of those that wield the most social and financial power.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, but our current stance of allowing the corrupt to rob most of the population of the country is going very poorly for that same most of the population. The continuing squeezing of most of our finances ought to be an indicator of that.
“Ah, the wonderful time of having your entertainment and probably all other choices decided entirely by what serves the most wealthy of civilization’s whims and foibles.”
AKA what it’s been like since the beginning of television.
Thanks for your “insight”.
Go ahead and pirate it, if they don’t offer a legal way to watch it then they really don’t want your money.And frankly it should be a law by itself that if they don’t offer a legal way to watch a movie/tv show/play a game/listen to music with a decent price then it would mean they have abandoned the product and thus making it legal to download. And strip them on the IP while you’re at it. Sell it to someone that actually cares.
it should be a law by itself that if they don’t offer a legal way to watch a movie/tv show/play a game/listen to music with a decent priceNo it shouldn’t.
Yeah, it should. The entire point of intellectual property protections are to provide incentives for folk to publish and advance the useful arts and sciences. When someone has been published and there is *no way* to access it any longer due to the technical controls of our misbegotten era, it is ethical and should be legal to provide for its ongoing availability.
It should be a law that Tuesday is Ice Cream Day for everyone
Every day can be Ice Cream Day if you want it to be.
?????????????
Why not, aside from the subjectivity of a “decent price”? At best it’s a cynical tax dodge and at worst it’s creating artificial scarcity. As others have said the other outcome is pirating, where no one profits.
Aside from my personal belief that the public simply isn’t entitled to privately-produced entertainment just because it exists, and aside from the fact that the unrealistic expectation that everything should always be available in perpetuity is largely driven by streaming services that I believe inherently devalue art, there are practical hurdles to making a private work available to the public for free. Studio movies and TV shows are accompanied by a bundle of licensing agreements, most notably for things like music – agreements that probably don’t take into account the possibility that the work could become abandoned. I also have a hard time believing that writers and actors are too thrilled with the possibility that their work is being consumed with no possibility for royalties (a possibility that technically exists even if a title is unavailable to purchase, because new deals are constantly being struck to make old works available on new platforms – even if a company takes a tax write-down like Disney).Having said all of that, I have no moral opposition to people pirating works that are unavailable to purchase anywhere legally. If you literally can’t give a company money in exchange for their content, fuck it. But to write legislation that essentially legalizes piracy, even in very specific situations like what the commenter I replied to suggested, opens up a giant can of worms that’s more trouble (and more anti-artist) than it’s worth. At least IMO. YM (and politics) MV.The arbitrary inclusion of “a decent price” as a criteria also triggered me tbh.
I don’t think they meant it should be free unless I misread their comment but the point you make about licensing arrangements for music and such does mean there’s no way to make it a standard fee so any scheme to compensate those entitled would have to be set up individually. By…the government, I guess. Yeah, it’s unworkable. Nice idea though.I suppose a much more limited copyright law would have much the same effect but then people wouldn’t be willing to invest as much money, time or effort in something with a limited window to be profitable. Personally I think the lifetime of the creator(s) seems like a natural term but I realize that if I were a the heir of someone who created a popular IP I would probably feel differently. The same if I had a burning desire to expand on some abandoned IP but couldn’t get permission.
“the unrealistic expectation that everything should always be available in perpetuity is largely driven by streaming services that I believe inherently devalue art”Impressive you could type that with one hand.
Where’s the lie?
I mean you’re stating that art has “value” in transience and unavailability. With that attitude you may as well be collecting NFTs.That’s also a big “fuck you” to people with limited access to galleries or cinemas or online infrastructure, ie. poor people.
Except the pirates.
“And frankly it should be a law by itself that if they don’t offer a legal way to watch a movie/tv show/play a game/listen to music with a decent price then it would mean they have abandoned the product and thus making it legal to download. And strip them on the IP while you’re at it. Sell it to someone that actually cares.”
Shhhhh, stop talking.
I think it should be a law that when restaurants go out of business they should have to release their recipes to the public.
Let’s repeal DMCPA and replace it with your post. Like literally just copy and paste your post in place of DMCPA and call it good.
I love a good example of this Dunning-Kruger effect.
TBH Warwick should be pleased they’ve taken it off so nobody see’s that he was easily the worst part of what could have been a decent show. The rest of the cast put in good performances only for scenes to be dragged down whenever Willow was onscreen.
He should stick to presenting and doing things with Karl Pilkington. He is not a good enough actor.
Like every other studio that foolishly stumbled into the streaming business 10 years late, only to find, yup, no money there,Is it just me, or does it feel like the moment the WGA came out on top with the AMPTP all of the entertainment news suddenly bought into the “Oh no, we’re not making any money at all and shouldn’t be paying success-based residuals” malarkey the studios were pushing as justification for stiffing writers and actors?
Yep. 10 million subscribers at $10/month gets you a slick $1.2 billion a year. Operational costs aren’t cheap cheap, but as long as you’re not overbuying content and projecting exponential growth in perpetuity, that’s a frickin’ great business.
But..but they were/are “overbuying content and projecting exponential growth in perpetuity.” I work for the Mouse and the amount of money it takes to get even the smallest shit done is insane. And when just one of your series titles is like 200m, and you’ve got 8-10 projects of that size in the pipeline every fiscal year, you’re gonna end up getting subsidized by the parts of the empire that weren’t born into a sea of red ink.*
*D+, which isn’t my main focus at work, is still something on my desk pretty much every day. And they are squeezing the shit out of it, trying to make it – if not profitable – then at least not such a money-hemorrhaging shitshow.
Riight, that goes to show how colossally Disney, et. al. are mismanaging what ought to be one of the easiest layups in business.To be fair, it is a _little_ bit difficult when your competition is overbuying content like it’s going out of style, but with a massive back catalog of content like the Mouse has? Just sit back, make a few smart, judicious buys, and tell the analysts urging you to grow at all costs to pound sand, and wait for the bloodletting.
Agreed, 109%. I worked in budgets for features and DisneyChannel once upon a time, and nothing I ever saw made me wince like the reports now about how much something Secret Invasion or Willow ended up costing.* It’s like everyone looked at Iger’s buying spree and went “Ah, you gotta spend money to make money, that’s right!” without really considering what they were spending the money on.
*I no longer work with or handle budgets, but if I did, I sure as fuck wouldn’t skip over them like I used to. I would love to know where that money’s actually spent.
But when a single show like Willow costs, what, $100M to make, that $1.2B is going to evaporate fast.
Yeah. Maybe don’t toss $100M into the void on a whim is part of what I’m saying. Even a priori, were I running the Mouse, I don’t think there’s any way I can believe a Willow series is going to make back $100M, it would have to be way cheaper. GoT was a bonkers hit for HBO, but the mass audience is fickle, you have to know they’re going to want a break from swords and spells fantasy. Willow wasn’t so well beloved of a property to have a dedicated fan base — it was a perfectly fine big budget fantasy movie released during the time where we got, like, one of those a year if we were lucky.So for the buy to make direct fiscal sense, it’d have to be something like: the series concept and execution is an absolute banger and it’s worth the risk (no), it’s gonna pull in a new audience (Disney doesn’t need this), or we need to do it to for media attention or to attract key personnel to our studio (again, Disney doesn’t need this).
Disney does actually need it, though, since there’s a finite amount of people who are going to pay for a streamer just to watch Snow White for the umpteenth time, even if they have families/kids. They need sexy/buzzy/exciting new content to pull in subscribers.And those kinds of shows are expensive. $100M for a season is about right. Create ten new shows and that $1B subscriber money is gonna go fast.
We can debate whether or not Willow was a good choice for that. But it’s not a surprising one, given Disney’s relentless strip mining of their franchises.
Yeah but my god you saw the budgets for a lot of these shows across the various platforms. I can’t be the only one who looked at those announcements and was completely bewildered about how they’d ever make money. It seemed like the ultimate “Yes we lose $3 per unit, but make it up on volume!” business plan. A billion dollars for a LOTR series that doesn’t feature any of the known characters??
I have to assume the LoTR buy was mostly because Bezos is a huge nerd. Didn’t he also have a personal hand in saving The Expanse?
Billionaires aren’t always entirely evil, I guess is what I’m saying.
Assuming you don’t spend that billion for the rights to Seinfeld for one year or to get five hastily tossed off Adam Sandler movies
Or pay for the personnel and infrastructure to build and operate a streaming service. The “I built and maintained my uncle’s wife muffin shop’s WordPress website, why does Facebook need more than one employee?” crowd think that shit is cheap. Licensing content was always going to be a better proposition, but executives must constantly show investors that they are doing something to chase that infinite growth that kill a lot of perfectly good companies.It took Netflix years to become Netflix.
Yes, it’s just you.The fact that streaming services lose money has been one of the most widely reported financial news in the last 15 years. Netflix is the only service that makes a profit and it took them a decade to get there.
You’re probably right. I think I’ve just still got strike talking points in my head. It just feels like something about the tone of it’s shifted, but it probably is just me.
What with what it’d done to Star Wars, and the inevitable diminishing returns of Marvel if Kevin ever leaves, Disney may find it wants to be a little less cavalier in disposing with the IP it has bought. A franchise is for life, not just for Christmas, Mickey.
Why not make it available on VOD rental/buy? That I don’t understand.
Because. It. Was. A. Tax. Writer-down. And. They. Therefore. Cannot. Distribute. It.
Jesus fucking Christ.
In other news Disney+’s CRATER can now be bought or rented on Amazon Prime.Just don’t expect to find anything at the moment other than Willow the movie. That may change in the future who knows. CRATER has resurfaced…
At least it was new content, damning with faint praise.
“Please tell me [Walt Disney Company], what do I say to these subscribers when they ask why they can’t watch the series any more?”You could tell them that you’re neither the producer nor the distributor, and that you don’t have anything to do with those decisions.
I feel for Warwick – he seems obviously proud of the show and it does have the feel of a rug-pull to have it yanked off Disney+ just a couple months after release – but I was still holding out hope they’d redirect the Willow S2 budget into another season of The Mysterious Benedict Society. Alas…
I want both series back!
This is our digital streaming future now that we’ve allowed physical media to be killed. We’re at the whims of the studios now. Enjoy renting forever, I guess.
(or X’d, or whatever you want to call it—as long as you call us “Ray,” “J,” or “Ray J”). Someone for fuck’s sake, smash this writer’s keyboard over his head.I swear to god if this site just reprinted old articles randomly instead of the dreck it has now, we’d all be better for it
They actually tried that for while, and it was an improvement, for me at least, until I realized I was replying to comments that were 8 years old. Just copy paste the article into a new post and and I don’t think anyone would complain.
My process lately is: come to this site, get pissed off at the lack of decent reporting and the absolutely absurd number of slideshows, then go find these articles again:
Film – Features – The Popcorn Champs – Pop culture news, movie, TV, music and gaming reviews. | The A.V. Club (avclub.com)
It wasn’t for a tax write down, that was a one time thing for the HBO-Discovery merger.This was to not have to pay residuals and a preemptive union busting move to deprive their workers of money through a loophole.
Thank you. I feel like the “its a tax write-off!!!!!!” is a bogeyman that has been blown way out of proportion. The tax system is flawed, but this is not studios “exploiting a loophole” or whatever. The studios are doing plenty of shitty things, not the least of which is taking these shows out of rotation to avoid paying anyone a post-production residual. To your point, *that* is the story. D+ spending $105 million (I think) on Willow and then getting to recoup $30 million or so in taxes for the lost investment *still* results in a loss to Disney. I doubt that Willow brought in close to 875,000 subscribers (paying $10/month for a whole year, rough math) to break even on the production cost alone.In other words, Disney is not creating these shows hoping for a tax break because that would still mean they are losing money. They are taking a legal reduction in their losses because of their own inability to understand the economics of streaming. Again, Disney is doing plenty of dumb/wrong/immoral/anti-consumer shit before we get to “impairment of an asset for US GAAP and the IRS”.
Although it had fuck-all to do with the Willow story itself, props to you for bringing the story, the legend, of Ray J Johnson to the younger generation.
Krusty is not amused
Final nail in Gabbo’s coffin, though!
That oughta hold the little SOBs!
When I was a lad, TV shows played ONCE EVER and you had to be there on time. Maybe if you were lucky they got re-run sometime over the summer. And then all you could do was remember them and we LIKED it that way!
No. No, we didn’t. That’s why we invented VCRs to either rent them from the store or tape them off of the TV and watch them again later.
I remember when we had to rent the VCRs themselves. Our local VCR/tape rental place was the back of a carpet store! I forever associate watching tapes with the smell of carpet glue.
I’m not saying that the inhalation of industrial adhesive fumes at a developing age has anything to do with your taste in movies…but…I’m not not saying it, either.
Well, I did live under power lines and got most of my nutrition by scavenging an old lead paint plant…
um… he’s clearly joking…
ok millennial
It does suck that, if you content is only on streaming, it can be disappeared. At least in legacy media, there would be a tape or DVD bouncing around. I have resorted to torrenting when something can no longer be found legally.
Misfits of Science 🙁
Who is the “we” here? I grew up with traditional TV. We did have VCRs but it was before DVRs and OnDemand took effect and it sucked. You either had to remember to record something and fiddle around with the controls for that or arrange your entire schedule around watching something.
We also got 20+ shows in a season, and if there was a cliffhanger season finale? We had to wait 4 months or so to get it resolved.
Disney absolutely dropped the ball on Willow. Of course it was never going to match up to the absurd ratings of a Star Wars or Marvel, but they didn’t give it a chance to grow its audience. They scrubbed it right before Pride Month instead of promoting it as starring its first canon lesbian princess. Then everybody who was introduced to Ruby Cruz in Bottoms had to resort to piracy to see her in this.
https://mattthecatania.wordpress.com/2023/01/11/will-willow-work-as-television/
Bottoms is the first and only movie I’ve seen in theaters since *waves hand around at world* and it was a friggin’ delight, as was Ruby Cruz.
Now that Disney owns everything, all the shows produced under their auspices are ‘samey’. Very much an issue of “Seen one, seen ‘em all”, so is it any wonder that lots of people pick one, probably their favourite of the Disney-owned franchises, and then don’t bother keeping up with the rest. So anything not absolutely the most popular/current will be at a serious disadvantage and be most likely to drift into lower numbers and cancellation/withdrawal. This is what happens when one giant corporation owns all the entertainment outlets. More ‘brands’, but less choice. The same thing happens in supermarkets; fifteen different varieties of strawberry jam…but when’s the last time you saw greengage, plum or bramble jam?
It’s a shame – Warwick Davis is a swell actor and from all accounts a swell guy, and Willow was the flick that introduced me to him. It also acclimated me to fantasy at a time when I was mostly a Star Wars kid, thereby doubling my nerd pleasure. Davis’ work, and the character, and the world, deserve to be seen.On the other hand, because I loved Willow, I didn’t take too well to the rock music, the ladies with the hats from Walmart, or Willow in a Canadian tuxedo. Here I was, hoping I’d get a better sequel than that Chris Claremont book that I chucked across the room, but nooooooooooo. Good thing I still have the Willow Sourcebook from 1988. I can run my own sequel, with AD&D 2nd Edition, and blackjack, and hoo- okay, no, just the AD&D part. D+ nothin’. [For the record: I was totally 100% A-OK with female leads, and in fact thought it was pretty damn cool. That was not my beef. No, my beef was with someone parking a monster truck at my renfaire. I didn’t bail on the show for any other reason. Maybe other people whined about it being ‘woke’, but let’s not pretend that the show didn’t have other…traits.]
As someone who enjoyed the show I will say it probably has a very specific appeal and you have to vibe with it to have it really click, rock music and all, which admittedly is a problem when you’re working or the Mouse and they want you to make a product that brings in big numbers. The show has found a passionate niche audience but clearly that’s not enough. It’s a pity cause I think the show had charm and I wish the entertainment business would allow little weird and silly projects like this to thrive. Oh well…
“I meet lovely people on a daily basis who are fans of Willow, who are the reason the Disney+ series was made,” Davis tweeted (or X’d, or whatever you want to call it—as long as you call us “Ray,” “J,” or “Ray J”).
This is the worst sentence ever written, not sure whether to blame Elon Musk or the author of this article (I’m absolving Warwick Davies).
I love Warwick Davis but isn’t he being a scab promoting struck work?
Think this comment section is way off. This was a surprisingly decent series, despite the fact no-one had any need for it. I didn’t even like Willow that much ffs. The series had a load of good writing and a lot of heart/humour. Well worth a go.
Warwick Davis is obviously right here, why are Disney just hooking properties from streaming and destroying a production’s ability to get any new viewers? You literally can’t watch this show anywhere legally now. It’s been wiped off the face of the planet.
Everything that’s happening with streaming right now is why I still believe in physical media.
Was the series complete? Or just a first season, with no ending?