Sony Doesn't Play Fair? Disney Doesn’t Play Fair: A History of Strategic Sabotage

Alright...time for a little history lesson, folks!

So news hit that Sony Pictures decided to move their release date of "Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse," to June 18, 2027. This would actually put it in direct competition with Pixar's "Gatto," which will be releasing on the same day. Now, it's not difficult to see why Sony did this: they are absolutely killing it with their animation. Discarding "Fixed" for a second, they just released the most popular Netflix film in the form of "KPop Demon Slayers," their Spider-Man animated movies have been winning all sorts of awards, and their upcoming "Goat" movie looks pretty good too. Meanwhile, it is no secret that Disney and Pixar have been struggling, especially when it comes to their original movies.

Needless to say, the company could use a win, and "Gatto" is likely going to suffer going up against Spider-Man unless it decides to move. Even from my perspective, it is clear that Sony is throwing their success in Disney's face. Are they wrong to do that though? That was the question being asked by an animation fan on the social media platform X.

Before we answer this question, we have to establish once again that movies are a business. Even if there are petty rivalries, first and foremost, this is a business. It is not "abusive" to pit movies against one another for competition. In fact, it's usually a good thing when there are options out there for moviegoers.

But secondly, I want to point out that while ALL companies do this, Disney is actually the worst! Like, their history of positioning their animated films to hurt their competition is well documented, and if this was an abusive tactic, Disney did it FAR longer and MUCH worse than Sony! Let's highlight some key releases and dates:

The Rescuers Down Under (November 16, 1990) - The Nutcracker Prince (November 21, 1990)

Disney released their major holiday movie a mere week before MCA's big animated holiday release. While "The Rescuers Down Under" was not one of their better-performing titles, it certainly did better than "The Nutcracker Prince" did.

Beauty and the Beast  (November 22, 1991) - An American Tail: Fievel Goes West (November 22, 1991)

"Beauty and the Beast" was released on the same day Universal Studios released the anticipated sequel to "An American Tail." Guess which one did better?

Ant (October 2, 1998) - A Bug’s Life (November 25, 1998)

This was a more obvious war because DreamWorks fired the first shot here. Still, Disney refused to budge, believing that their movie would do better at the box office (they were right, though critical evaluation has favored "Antz" more than "A Bug's Life"). This was also done a couple of weeks before "The Prince of Egypt" (December 18), if you think the date was just a coincidence.

Tarzan (June 18, 1999) - The Iron Giant (August 6, 1999)

While a little more breathing room was given here, Disney scheduled Tarzan mighty close to Brad Bird's The Iron Giant. Keep in mind that hit movies stayed in theaters longer back then, so having an established animated movie in theaters was certainly going to take a bite out of Warner Bros.' film.

And we're not talking just about new movies: Disney has used re-releases to crush their competition as well.

When "Rover Dangerfield" was released on August 2, 1991, Disney decided a couple of weeks early that it would be a great time to re-release "101 Dalmatians" (July 12). When "The Swan Princess" was released on November 18, 1994, Disney did a surprise re-release of "The Lion King" that same DAY!

When Don Bluth (someone with whom Disney has a special history) released "Anastasia" for Fox Animation on November 21, 1997, Disney did a double attack by re-releasing "The Little Mermaid" on November 12 and releasing "Flubber" (with Robin Williams) on November 26, doing everything they could to bury that movie (their attempts weren't as successful, though its clear "Anastasia" would have made more without the attacks).

Now, there is certainly a case to be made that these Disney movies were mostly better than the competition. When choosing where to spend your hard-earned money, the choice between most of these was pretty easy. But then, why did Disney have to encroach on all of these movies? Couldn't they let those movies breathe without their major films and re-releases breathing down their necks? Most would have done better without that.

But this isn't Disneyland, and there's no such thing as co-existing: this is business, and Disney does dirty business better than them all. Not that they are the only ones; in 2004, DreamWorks famously released the DVD of "Shrek 2" on a Friday, the exact same day Pixar's "The Incredibles" was released. But Disney was the worst, is the worst, and probably will always be the worst.

In fact, let's bring up a more recent example. In 2020, after months of movie theaters being shut down, Christopher Nolan and Warner Bros. took a huge chance and released "Tenet" on September 3, 2020. This was a release movie theaters needed: a major film by a certifiable box office draw during a time when people were hesitant to leave their houses.

Do you know what Disney did?

They released the live-action "Mulan" on Disney+ on September 4, 2020, essentially giving people an option to stay home. Rather than help the theaters out by also releasing "Mulan" into theaters (a situation where both movies would have thrived), they took advantage of the situation to sell more Disney+ subscriptions (as well as a new Premier Access tier, I'm sure they wanted to become standard) as well as hurt "Tenet" in the process.

So while I am looking forward to Pixar's new film, don't get upset if Sony, who is KILLING IT with their animation these days, decides to put some pressure on them, because God knows Disney was dishing it out when they were on top, and now they need to either take it or adapt!

Update 9/26/2025 - Corrected release date for movies.