What if YOU were CEO of Disney?

All topics relating to Disney-branded content.
Racer_prince
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 am

Post by Racer_prince »

estefan wrote:Okay, let me explain my reasoning for firing the Jonas Brothers:

Yes, Annette Funicello and Hayley Mills were also singers who released albums under Disney. But, they were not only talented, they appealed to a much broader demographic.

This is a matter of opinion, but the Jonas Brothers have ZERO talent. They can't sing their way out of a paper-bag, they cannot act and they have no stage presence whatsoever. Frankly, they're in a way, ruining the Disney image of being aimed at everybody. But, the Jonas's are only majorly popular with tweenage girls. Most people outside of that demographic see them for the awful product they are. And Disney should be releasing quality product out on the marketplace. The Jonas Brothers are one of the main factors why a lot of people think Disney (sans Pixar) is only aimed at tweens and girls nowadays.

If I were CEO of Disney, I would return Disney to being aimed at everybody, not just one key demographic. Funnicello and Mills were popular with most everybody. The Jonas Boys? Not so much.
I disagree. Having seen the Jonas Brothers live (the tickets were free, and I didn't want to waste them, don't judge me) they are actually great singers, and have great stage presence. True, they can't act, but they do have musical talent. Miley Cyrus, on the other hand, isn't a very good singer, and isn't a very good actor.

And I was in no way saying that NO Disney kid should be a singer. But there is no reason that every single kid or teen on a Disney Channel show has to have a musical career. Save it for the ones with actual talent.
User avatar
Duckburger
Special Edition
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 4:23 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Duckburger »

I agree with you blackcauldron85. Why cancel something like JONAS, or fire the Jonas Brothers. They are hugely popular, and do well with the target demographic. As much as you all dislike it, I'm afraid the people who are working for the Disney Channel have stopped caring about all of our opinions once we've reached the age of 15. And as already said, it's not really a new concept either, Mickey Mouse Club springs to mind. After all that is where the likes of Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake first appeared.

What I would do...
- Make all of Disney's television networks better. Less re-runs. More television animation for the Disney Channel (50/50 live-action and animation). Later at night some classic programs perhaps. No seperate Playhouse Disney channel - but instead make it something like Disney Cinemagic, with Disney movies and classic programming. Make Disney XD's bumpers less obnoxiously aimed at boys. Try harder to find a way to change ABC Family's name.
- I'd try to move away from making only franchise-like movies, or movies just for the sake of merchandising it to death.
- I'd let the animation division make a hand-drawn animated film of a very popular story (Wizard of Oz would have been perfect), so that it's surely successful, revitalising the medium. *wishful thinking*
- I'm almost inclined to say fire Rich Ross, but I won't since he hasn't really greenlighted much yet, so that's a little unfair I guess.
- Keep the name "Walt Disney Pictures Presents", "Walt Disney Pictures" or "Walt Disney's" - just stop with the just putting "Disney" there. It's a little detail, but it bothers me so much. And lastly, make the special features on all non-Diamond Edition/non-Pixar releases better. Seriously.
Racer_prince
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 am

Post by Racer_prince »

Duckburger wrote:I agree with you blackcauldron85. Why cancel something like JONAS, or fire the Jonas Brothers. They are hugely popular, and do well with the target demographic. As much as you all dislike it, I'm afraid the people who are working for the Disney Channel have stopped caring about all of our opinions once we've reached the age of 15. And as already said, it's not really a new concept either, Mickey Mouse Club springs to mind. After all that is where the likes of Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake first appeared.
Exactly. If people want to make Disney for everybody, why are you so quick to exclude tweens?
merlinjones
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1056
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am

Post by merlinjones »

Note on Annette and Hayley VS. Disney Channel stars: There is a difference. Annette and Hayley WERE "Walt Disney" in that they starred in Walt Disney "family entertainment" TV series and movies (Pollyanna, Babes in Toyland, The Shaggy Dog, The Parent Trap, The Mickey Mouse Club) that were part of Walt's worldview and an extension of the whole Studio as it was - - Annette hosted Mickey Mouse cartoons and Hayley received a juvenile Oscar -- yes, they sold records and products and expanded Disney's appeal to teens, but they were EXTENSIONS of "Walt Disney" not REPLACEMENTS for Walt Disney. The Disney Channel consumer lifestyle tween ethic is completely separate from anything truly Walt Disney - - a total rebranding. Not the same thing at all. (As it is, Mouseketeer TV star and teen idol Annette would be a closer model for the Channel's Miley, JONAS etc. - - but Hayley would be more like Lindsay Lohan before the fall: a movie star -- But both were more far more popular and talented and broadly appealing to all ages). One reason I have always felt the Disney Channel tween thing should have had its own unique brand (ABC Kids or whatever) and NOT "Disney." It changed the word in the wrong way: cheapened it.
Last edited by merlinjones on Fri Jun 25, 2010 12:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
jpanimation
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1841
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:00 am

Post by jpanimation »

Racer_prince wrote:-Make a new Haunted Mansion movie. So much wasted potential... :(
I agree, it was wasted potential. Beautiful sets, costumes, and design but as soon as they announced Eddie Murphy's involvement, I knew they weren't taking it seriously like they did with Pirates. I'd only let them try again if they had a really good idea, if not, leave the classic attraction in peace. At one point I thought they were making a Jungle Cruise movie, but I guess they came to their senses (seriously, I always felt The African Queen was they Jungle Cruise movie).
blackcauldron85 wrote:
jpanimation wrote:Reinstate the name Disney*MGM Studios
-Disney Hollywood Studios is a horribly generic name
-I don't give a s**t about licensing difficulties, just do it
Well, if you were CEO, you'd have to give a sh**, since you wouldn't want to be sued...
What I really meant was I wouldn't just give up when the license is difficult to obtain and I'd keep pursuing it. I never meant I'd just steal it. Besides, a bankrupt studio like MGM should be really easy to negotiate with.
Image
User avatar
blackcauldron85
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16689
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
Gender: Female
Contact:

Post by blackcauldron85 »

estefan wrote:This is a matter of opinion, but the Jonas Brothers have ZERO talent. They can't sing their way out of a paper-bag, they cannot act and they have no stage presence whatsoever. Frankly, they're in a way, ruining the Disney image of being aimed at everybody. But, the Jonas's are only majorly popular with tweenage girls. Most people outside of that demographic see them for the awful product they are. And Disney should be releasing quality product out on the marketplace.
To each his own, but they do not have ZERO talent. They're extremely talented. They play, write, sing... Disney's tween and teen offerings aren't their only product. While it sometimes seems like they market their tween and teen brands more than anything else, it's not like they neglect their other properties. And for a band with a target audience of tween and teen girls, Jonas Brothers are a damn fine good band to do so- it's not like they're of a poor quality at all.

(And I think that Miley has a great voice. It is pretty powerful, in all honesty.)
Duckburger wrote:I agree with you blackcauldron85. Why cancel something like JONAS, or fire the Jonas Brothers. They are hugely popular, and do well with the target demographic. As much as you all dislike it, I'm afraid the people who are working for the Disney Channel have stopped caring about all of our opinions once we've reached the age of 15. And as already said, it's not really a new concept either, Mickey Mouse Club springs to mind. After all that is where the likes of Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake first appeared.
Absolutely. Music aimed at teenagers has been around for DECADES, and will continue to be around. Disney's product in this arena has generally been great (we'll forget about T-Squad and Devo 2.0). In all honesty, it really has. Disney doesn't just cater to one demographic. I get that it sucks when people think that DACs are only for kids, but just because Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus are on Hollywood Records and the Disney Channel doesn't mean that they can be blamed for people being ignorant.
Image
User avatar
nomad2010
Special Edition
Posts: 647
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:44 pm
Location: dfs
Contact:

Post by nomad2010 »

I would put the focus on hand drawn animation. Not just because I love it, but because if it were not for it, Disney wouldn't be here today. Disney Hand drawn films are some of the most beloved and most recognizable films in the world. The Fab Four are the Fab Four because they were emotional gripping, serious in tone, and truly had astonishing music. No other films in recent years have taken us into such diverse and interesting worlds. Disney does not realize this, but everyone is waiting for the next Beauty and the Beast or Lion King. They want something emotionally charged, with real despair and sorrow. They need to make ADULT films for kids. Not kid films for adults.
TheSequelOfDisney
Signature Collection
Posts: 5263
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Ohio, United States of America

Post by TheSequelOfDisney »

I really only have two things (well, for now):

1. The Disney Channel - I can't even remember the last time that I watched the Disney Channel. It is so full of, for lack of a better word, crappiness. The last show that remember watching and loving was That's So Raven and even after awhile that got to be a little repetitive and uninteresting. I feel like the start of the downfall of the Disney Channel was with High School Musical in 2006. At first, sure, I really liked it along with most everyone else. Then came a series of DCOMs that focused on singing, dancing, and somewhat talentless teenagers. They surely became a styled format without any creativity and I lost interest (mind you, I was a teenager when all of this was happening, so even if they were marketing to teens, which they were, it simply wasn't working for me). This wave of untalented teens continues to today. I throwup whenever I hear one of the terrible songs written for Miley Cyrus or the Jonas Brothers to sing. I just don't understand why they are so persistant on creating more and more of this crappy television. I understand that it makes big bucks, but eventually they are going to realize that all of the shows that are currently on the air are uninteresting, poorly produced/written and full of untalented teenagers that apparently seen likable to todays modern tweens/teens. The older films/shorts/television programming (dating back to when TV first came around) were all much more imaginitive, interesting and had an overall high quality and standard to them. I would love, love, love to see the Disney Channel show classic, older films/shorts/television programs because they are so much better than todays programs/DCOMs. It just doesn't make sense to me as to why they would keep this locked away to "rot" in the vault while today's rubbish is being shown. I would release these so called Disney Channel Stars and reintroduce the classic programming that made Disney programming a staple to the creator's name. This was a lot longer of a rant than I had envisioned, but I feel like this is one of the major flaws in the company right now.

2. John Lasseter - Now, I don't hate this man. He has shown quality in the films that he has made (except for Cars, that was just terrible) and I really appreciate how much he wants to be involved in Disney. But, I believe that he should choose either Disney or Pixar (preferable Pixar). I understand that he is trying but I believe that he is compromising on some levels in favor of Pixar and he is not living up to the quality of Disney films that we as fans expect. I suggest that we bring in another head of Disney, possibly Andreas Deja, Eric Goldman, Ron & Jon, John Canemaker, Leonard Maltin, among others. I just think that it would be better if the creative side of things would be split up so that Mr. Lasseter doesn't have to compromise on certain aspects.
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
MutantEnemy
Special Edition
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 4:46 pm
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by MutantEnemy »

TheSequelOfDisney wrote:2. John Lasseter - Now, I don't hate this man. He has shown quality in the films that he has made (except for Cars, that was just terrible) and I really appreciate how much he wants to be involved in Disney. But, I believe that he should choose either Disney or Pixar (preferable Pixar). I understand that he is trying but I believe that he is compromising on some levels in favor of Pixar and he is not living up to the quality of Disney films that we as fans expect. I suggest that we bring in another head of Disney, possibly Andreas Deja, Eric Goldman, Ron & Jon, John Canemaker, Leonard Maltin, among others. I just think that it would be better if the creative side of things would be split up so that Mr. Lasseter doesn't have to compromise on certain aspects.
I agree 100%! He has way too much on his plate, and quality will suffer (on the WDAS side, of course!).
Racer_prince
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 am

Post by Racer_prince »

nomad2010 wrote:I would put the focus on hand drawn animation. Not just because I love it, but because if it were not for it, Disney wouldn't be here today. Disney Hand drawn films are some of the most beloved and most recognizable films in the world. The Fab Four are the Fab Four because they were emotional gripping, serious in tone, and truly had astonishing music. No other films in recent years have taken us into such diverse and interesting worlds. Disney does not realize this, but everyone is waiting for the next Beauty and the Beast or Lion King. They want something emotionally charged, with real despair and sorrow. They need to make ADULT films for kids. Not kid films for adults.
You know, I really love how everyone insists that the animation isn't what made the older Disney films great, and then say that Disney should only be doing handrawn animation. :P
User avatar
Margos
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: A small suburban/rural town in PA

Post by Margos »

jpanimation wrote: [*]Reopen the former DisneyToon Studios
-returning to their hand-drawn roots
-let them do their own original projects
-possibly more risky, less Disney-like projects
Oh, good one! I forgot to mention this! I used to hate DisneyToon Studios, but with the Tinker Bell films, they've proven that they've learned what it takes to make a good movie. This series has earned them their wings.... Now they ought to be allowed to use them. However, they have shown a growth in their use of CG (compare the original Tinker Bell movie to the previews shown for Great Fairy Rescue.... they've been loosening up a bit, and it looks great). None of their hand-drawn projects looked that good, as they were mostly just poor copies of DACs. However, with the computer, they have developed lush, gorgeous backgrounds and aesthetically-appealing character models.... They could do very well as a mainly CG studio.

Oh, and I think Tim Burton should have his own stop-motion studio that would be Disney owned and operated. Why? Just 'cuz. It would be fun. And maybe they could even buy the rights to Corpse Bride....
http://dragonsbane.webs.com
http://childrenofnight.webs.com

^My websites promoting my two WIP novels! Check them out for exclusive content!
User avatar
Goliath
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4749
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:35 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Goliath »

- Make sure the 80% of the people who still buy only dvd's get just as good a product as people who buy BluRay (including all bonus features).
- Make sure all new releases come out on BluRay as well as dvd (including so-called 'Dark Age' movies).
- End the ban on 'Dark Age'-characters when it comes to marketing and merchandise.
- Resume work on the 2D, hand-drawn project 'The Snow Queen'.
- Cancel planned sequels of Pixar films.
- Cancel planned Roger Rabbit sequel.
- Making sure the Disney Channel will show vintage Disney again.
- Setting up a team to bring back quality Disney animated tv series (instead of the Cartoon Network clones they put out nowadays).
- Release the missing seasons of Disney Afternoon shows on dvd.
- Releasing all Disney Treasures in Europe as well.

- Improve working conditions in the Disney theme parks.
- Making sure not to do business with shady contractors in Asia anymore; making sure subcontractors abide to decent working conditions, pay decent salaries, allow unions to be formed, and outlaw child and 'slave labour'.
User avatar
nomad2010
Special Edition
Posts: 647
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:44 pm
Location: dfs
Contact:

Post by nomad2010 »

Racer_prince wrote: You know, I really love how everyone insists that the animation isn't what made the older Disney films great, and then say that Disney should only be doing handrawn animation. :P
I don't think you understood what I said. I don't think handrawn is the only form of films Disney should be doing. I DO, however, believe it should be the companies focus. Disney films are loved by the so many people. They are something everyone has seen. Disney is known for handrawn, and known for doing it well, although not in recent years. They have lost touch with their audience. They don't understand that people are dying for the next Beauty and the Beast, or the Lion King. They want a story with a lot of heart and a little magic. Disneys older films are so beloved because they were ADULT films in a form that children could easily relate to. They dealt with real emotion, real loss, and real pain. They weren't kid films aimed at adults. That's why these films are failing. They aren't taking us away and making us feel the emotion that the older films did. Sure, the animation may not be the only reason why they are so loved, but it is part of it. STORY comes first. Then animation. Disney doesn't seem to understand that kids can understand the same things today that they could 20 years ago. Why do they think that they deserve this crap? If they couldn't understand emotionally complex films anymore, then why are the fab four some of the strongest selling DVD titles of all time? The audience is there, Disney doesn't seem to understand that...
User avatar
estefan
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3195
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:27 pm

Post by estefan »

nomad2010 wrote:Disney doesn't seem to understand that kids can understand the same things today that they could 20 years ago. Why do they think that they deserve this crap? The audience is there, Disney doesn't seem to understand that...
Yep, the audience is there. They're just lining up to see Alvin and the Chipmunks instead. I completely understand why Disney thinks children are stupid these days. Heck, even Pixar films are more popular with adults. And very adult-minded family films like Where the Wild Things Are and Fantastic Mr Fox didn't exactly light up the box-office. Meanwhile, Alvin and Night at the Museum are smash hits.
Racer_prince
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 am

Post by Racer_prince »

estefan wrote:
nomad2010 wrote:Disney doesn't seem to understand that kids can understand the same things today that they could 20 years ago. Why do they think that they deserve this crap? The audience is there, Disney doesn't seem to understand that...
Yep, the audience is there. They're just lining up to see Alvin and the Chipmunks instead. I completely understand why Disney thinks children are stupid these days. Heck, even Pixar films are more popular with adults. And very adult-minded family films like Where the Wild Things Are and Fantastic Mr Fox didn't exactly light up the box-office. Meanwhile, Alvin and Night at the Museum are smash hits.
Where The Wild Things are isn't really a kids movie, though. It's more for adults who are feeling nostalgic for their childhoods. As a kid, I would have been bored with it, as are most now kids.
User avatar
Big Disney Fan
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3110
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:28 pm
Location: Any Disney park you choose

Post by Big Disney Fan »

Goliath wrote: - End the ban on 'Dark Age'-characters when it comes to marketing and merchandise.
What do you mean by 'Dark Age'-characters?
- Cancel planned Roger Rabbit sequel.
I don't know, I kinda would like to see a sequel for Roger Rabbit. I would get together with Robert Zemeckis and aggressively push forward with a RR sequel. In fact, I might put up a thread on the sequel idea in question.

I would also release on DVD what you might think is kind of an unwieldy idea for Disney movies: merging two Disney movies on one DVD set at a time. Go here to check them out: http://www.dvdizzy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... highlight= (this is for animated features) and http://www.dvdizzy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... highlight= (this is for cartoon shorts). As you can see, any ideas for bonuses and arrangement of the sets would be great. But please, don't post them here, post them on their threads.
TheSequelOfDisney
Signature Collection
Posts: 5263
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Ohio, United States of America

Post by TheSequelOfDisney »

Big Disney Fan wrote:What do you mean by 'Dark Age'-characters?
The Dark Age is usually considered to be the films between, and including, The Aristocats and Oliver & Company
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
Wonderlicious
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4661
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:47 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Wonderlicious »

Big Disney Fan wrote:
Goliath wrote: - End the ban on 'Dark Age'-characters when it comes to marketing and merchandise.
What do you mean by 'Dark Age'-characters?
I think what he means is characters from films made during the 70s and 80s (aka most things between The Jungle Book and The Little Mermaid). True, some characters and stories from this period are still publicised quite a bit (The Aristocats, Winnie the Pooh etc), but it's not as though we'd see any reference to The Black Cauldron in the theme parks very soon.
User avatar
Escapay
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 12562
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Contact:

Post by Escapay »

Quite simply, if I were CEO, I would keep moving forward instead of retroactively going backwards based on some of the suggestions listed in this thread.

Also, I'd greenlight a five-film Rocketeer movie series starring Adam Brody, Ellen Page, and Alan Arkin as Cliff, Jenny, and Peevy, respectively. ;)

And my pet project for WDAS would be a hand-drawn animated musical for The Velveteen Rabbit.

albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
Racer_prince
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 am

Post by Racer_prince »

Escapay wrote:Quite simply, if I were CEO, I would keep moving forward instead of retroactively going backwards based on some of the suggestions listed in this thread.

Also, I'd greenlight a five-film Rocketeer movie series starring Adam Brody, Ellen Page, and Alan Arkin as Cliff, Jenny, and Peevy, respectively. ;)

And my pet project for WDAS would be a hand-drawn animated musical for The Velveteen Rabbit.

albert
A Rocketeer film series would be awesome!
Post Reply