Given the previous claim was that some number of people will treat the business model and monetization approach with hostility I think it still holds true with Disney. They have been much derided for retelling public domain stories, then claiming ownership/trademarks/copyright (event going so far as pushing for changes to copyright law) to give themselves exclusive rights to market. And a lot of criticism of their whole “Disney Vault” approach to selling old VHS and DVD titles where only certain titles from the back catalogue would be available for sale in a given year, so you better buy them up quickly or miss out for potentially another 7 years.

> No one accused Disney of using cliff hangers to scam them.

Well, yes and no. When it comes to movies in general and movie adaptations of books in particular, like recently the Hobbit, number one complaint I heard (and expressed myself at times) is that they're so desperate for money that it's pathetic, stringing a short book for three movies ending in a way that ensures people will have to go to the cinema not just to continue watching, but also to rewatch the old movies upon release of the new one.

From what I can tell, the sentiment for now is that it's pathetic, not abusive.

As a creator would you rather be viewed as incompetent or malevolent?

The former.

I've certainly seen this opinion around Disney, especially around how much they're milking Star Wars releases, and the recent run of live-action remakes. It's not a universal thing, but "Enormous media company Disney churns out nostalgia-baiting cash-ins" is definitely a complaint that you even see among fairly reputable reviewers.

The biggest example of this was the "rerelease" of Infinity War to add a couple new scenes, and charging full price for people to rewatch a multi-hour movie for 5-10 mins more content.