Why is the Fab Five only for kids now?

[Big Disney Fan]

It pains me to see that Mickey and the gang are starting to have one thing in common with Trix cereal: it's just for kids. Or more specifically, kids in the single-digit range (case in point: Mickey Mouse Clubhouse). Why is that? Once upon a time, Mickey and the gang were for everybody of every age. But not anymore, right? Why is Disney so hung on eliminating the values of their assets? Mickey and company are highly valuable assets, but to only feature them in low quality animated product for toddlers reduces the value of those assets by making the audience believe that the characters are only for children five and under. And why does that show Mickey Mouse Clubhouse have to be a rip-off of Dora and Blue's Clues?

Mind you, they do release the classic shorts on DVD every now and then, and I am only too proud to say that I own all of the shorts on the Treasures, but why does it seem like whenever you see them in the stores nowadays, they're seen primarily with this "Clubhouse" nonsense? What is going on here?

Please, though, I don't want to turn this into an argument; I was just making a observation the likes of which I was getting tired of.

[Barbossa]

Move over fab five... Spider-man's in the house now!

[Disney Villain]

I understand where you’re coming from, but have you ever really thought that Disney is trying to do EXACTLY what you want them to?

No one ever stops to realize Disney is a company; one that competes with other fortune 500 companies, and one that needs to maintain a profit. Millions and millions of dollars go into research before ANYTHING gets produced. A ride or meet and greet won’t even see the light of day in a theme park unless Disney has researched it from all angles. A direct to video sequel or television series would never air, unless Disney did tons of research. Cover art for a Blu-Ray release would never go to print unless hours upon hours of time, and thousands of dollars went into researching it.

Disney is a company. No one seems to grasp this. It’s whine, whine ,whine. Yes, lets cancel 'Hannah Montana' and bring back Vault Disney and old shorts. I give the channel a week before they loose all their ratings. Do you people have ANY IDEA how much the teen universe like Hannah Montana, Wizards of Waverly Place, and High School Musical make for Disney? Billions! Go look who has the top song in the country…oh that’s right, it’s Miley Cyrus with her song, “Party in the U.SA”. Disney has made amazing leaps, and if Walt was here he would be doing the EXACT same thing. Walt was a creative man, but he was a business man. Let’s take a reality check people!

'Mickey Mouse Clubhouse' is actually bringing Mickey back into the minds of families and creating new Disney fans. Did you ever think of that? I hate to say it, but most children would have no clue who Mickey was before that show. He was just a company icon, but now he’s breeding a whole new generation of Disney fans. It’s no secret that Disney is trying to get Mickey Mouse and his universe back into the spotlight. They’ve already announced that they have big plans for the mouse.

However, you can’t just drop a new Mickey merchandise line or series of direct to video films out of the sky. If Disney made an all-new Mickey movie with characters like Daisy Duck, and Ludwig Von Drake, and Scrooge McDuck the kiddies and their parents wouldn’t buy it. They’re not familiar with the characters or worlds and would much rather grab the latest ‘Dora The Explorer’ film. Why? Because, Dora has a T.V. show. That led to toys and films and apparel, etc. The children like her and they grew up with her.

Disney wants to bring Mickey back, but they can’t because they did nothing with him for too long. That’s their fault, and they’re to blame. For the past decade Mickey and his universe should have been a top priority for marketing, but he wasn’t. More children know who Ariel is than Mickey Mouse! The show ‘Mickey Mouse Clubhouse’, is bringing these characters back. Children of today now know who Ludwig Von Drake is, they know all Mickey’s catch phrases and how hot tempered Donald can get. Now that Disney has unlocked a new generation of Disney fans, they can bring Mickey back for the whole family to enjoy.

Every time period, and every generation goes through it’s trends and fads. I was born in 1989. Around that time Disney had entered the VHS market. My parents were big on the new technology, and they started buying me the Disney classics on VHS. If it wasn’t for that I would not be typing here now. I grew up with ‘Darkwing Duck’ and ‘TaleSpin’. The children of today have ‘Mickey Mouse Clubhouse’ and ‘Little Einstein’s’. My teen shows were ‘All That’ and ‘Lizzie McGuire’. Today it’s 'Hannah Montana' and the 'Jonas Brothers'. For some of you it was Annette, or ‘Dumbo’s Circus’ or ‘Mousercise’. What is the friggen difference? Every generation has different things. We, however, seem to get fixated on our nostalgia of what we grew up with. We consider what we grew up with “classic” and “true Disney”. The children of today will look at ‘Mickey Mouse Clubhouse’ the same way I look at ‘Ducktales’. But none of this changes anything. Everything has always been, and always will be, a way to market characters, sell merchandise, and create new brands. That’s the truth.

I’m really not trying to be rude or single anyone out, but I am just sick of the bashing of “modern Disney”. If was Bob Iger, and I read some of the threads on this forum, I’d laugh. If I were running the company I would be doing the same thing Iger is doing now. Just remember, everything Disney does and creates has a purpose.

[Big Disney Fan]

Very insightful up there. I realize that Disney has a purpose. But is it really too much to ask that it also dedicate itself to some of the things that made it what it was in the first place?

[Wonderlicious]

Why are the Fab Five only for kids now? To teach children English grammar, of course!

[Disney Villain]

Very insightful up there. I realize that Disney has a purpose. But is it really too much to ask that it also dedicate itself to some of the things that made it what it was in the first place?

Thank you! And I also completely agree with what you just said. Disney has lost track of some of the more classic things, and there's NO EXCUSE for that. But I truly believe they are starting to turn around. You can still make a profit and maintain your dignity.

[Cordy_Biddle]

Very insightful up there. I realize that Disney has a purpose. But is it really too much to ask that it also dedicate itself to some of the things that made it what it was in the first place?

Thank you! And I also completely agree with what you just said. Disney has lost track of some of the more classic things, and there's NO EXCUSE for that. But I truly believe they are starting to turn around. You can still make a profit and maintain your dignity.

I agree also. Parents are probably made to feel very embarrassed whenever they sit down to watch most of the Mickey Mouse/Fab Five stuff these days; and I know the cashiers always give me funny looks whenever I take a Disney cartoon DVD to the register. Disney used to spell "Family Entertainment", now it's only toddlers and tweens.

[SpringHeelJack]

My theory is that because they have resisted any sort of modifications for most of their existence, it's hard to make them relevant. It's not Looney Toons. Mickey was never the wise-acre Bugs Bunny was. It's easier to pitch the slightly more subversive to older audiences than straight-forward youthful naivete. The closest Disney has ever gotten to something akin to that is Donald Duck, which again is why he was more popular than Mickey in the early 40s.

[rexcrk]

As far as "little kids" shows go I think Mickey Mouse Clubhouse is great.

In fact, I'd rather have Mickey and the gang teaching little kids than some generic characters.

Besides, we still have Kingdom Hearts to make them appeal to older audiences too

[Mickeyfan1990]

Well, the way I see it, nowadays the Fab Five kinda appeal to the younger audience which I find understandable. But it wouldn't hurt if Disney made new anmated shorts starring the any of the Fab Five (and Roger Rabbit of course) just to give the fans what they want. One thing's for sure, it won't be the same without Wayne Allwine.

[Cordy_Biddle]

Well, the way I see it, nowadays the Fab Five kinda appeal to the younger audience which I find understandable. But it wouldn't hurt if Disney made new anmated shorts starring the any of the Fab Five (and Roger Rabbit of course) just to give the fans what they want. One thing's for sure, it won't be the same without Wayne Allwine.

RIP Wayne. He was a brilliant Mickey Mouse.

[Poody]

I blame pixar.


j/k.......... kinda.

[BrandonH]

We've had "Goofy's How to Set Up a Home Theater" and The Three Musketeers in recent years, so I don't think Disney has abandoned the all-ages material with these characters.

[ajmrowland]

I agree with rexcrk on how square seems to handle these characters better than Disney themselves.

Also, I kinda miss Mouse of House. That had some good shorts going for it, and it's too bad that it was ignored.

[Big Disney Fan]

I agree with rexcrk on how square seems to handle these characters better than Disney themselves.

Also, I kinda miss Mouse of House. That had some good shorts going for it, and it's too bad that it was ignored.

I read somewhere that unlike "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse", "House of Mouse" became something for more serious Disney fans rather than the general public. Apparently, said general public thinks that Disney as we tend to know it has become old hat to them. How else can we explain why Disney has pretty much replaced Mickey Mouse with Troy Bolton and Minnie Mouse with Gabriella Montez (or whatever the (beep) her last name is)?

[Cordy_Biddle]

I agree with rexcrk on how square seems to handle these characters better than Disney themselves.

Also, I kinda miss Mouse of House. That had some good shorts going for it, and it's too bad that it was ignored.

I read somewhere that unlike "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse", "House of Mouse" became something for more serious Disney fans rather than the general public. Apparently, said general public thinks that Disney as we tend to know it has become old hat to them. How else can we explain why Disney has pretty much replaced Mickey Mouse with Troy Bolton and Minnie Mouse with Gabriella Montez (or whatever the (beep) her last name is)?

House of Mouse was pretty cool...I miss it.

[ajmrowland]

I agree with rexcrk on how square seems to handle these characters better than Disney themselves.

Also, I kinda miss Mouse of House. That had some good shorts going for it, and it's too bad that it was ignored.

I read somewhere that unlike "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse", "House of Mouse" became something for more serious Disney fans rather than the general public. Apparently, said general public thinks that Disney as we tend to know it has become old hat to them. How else can we explain why Disney has pretty much replaced Mickey Mouse with Troy Bolton and Minnie Mouse with Gabriella Montez (or whatever the (beep) her last name is)?

Maybe, but it doesn't excuse their giving up on MM/DD/G shorts. I like embracing new ideas, but that doesn't mean the "old" should be completely abandoned. Of course, we're talking about a major company, but still.

[Barbossa]

I heard this episode is in the works:
Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, with a special appearance by The Punisher. Kids 'll love it.

[Cordy_Biddle]

I heard this episode is in the works:
Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, with a special appearance by The Punisher. Kids 'll love it.

Can't wait to see that one, lol.

[Big Disney Fan]

I heard this episode is in the works:
Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, with a special appearance by The Punisher. Kids 'll love it.

Can't wait to see that one, lol.

I wonder what's gonna happen there?

I know one thing, if I have children and I show them the Disney characters, I will FORBID them to watch this Clubhouse nonsense. Instead, I will sort of lock them in the past and show the characters by way of the cartoons that put them on the map in the first place.