DVDizzy Forum

We have now seen the stock holders answers to the Disney board. While Mr. Eisner is still employed, change will occur with a 43% vote of no confidence. We have all talked about the lack of creativity in some areas of the corporation but what should be fixed first? Animation? Theme Parks? ABC/ESPN? Action Movies? Merge with another company? Just curious to hear some ideas and any suggestions on fixing the company.

Hmm, well I'd say when it comes to shareholder value, ABC is what needs to be fixed first and foremost.

But the priority in my eyes is: A) Bring traditional animation back, B) Fix the theme parks.

The problems at Disneyland have become more apparent to me the more times I visit: structures that need repair, whole areas that need to be filled (that lake used for the Submarine Voyage ride is sitting in Tomorrowland like a bump on a log), and employees that need to be properly trained (on other words, lessen the accidents like the one that recently occured at Walt Disney World).

Stop the "cheapquels", and begin proper, Feature Animation seqeuls. *BUT NOT TO WALT'S FILMS! JUST THE ONES FROM 1967 AND ON!

Prince Adam wrote:Stop the "cheapquels", and begin proper, Feature Animation seqeuls. *BUT NOT TO WALT'S FILMS! JUST THE ONES FROM 1967 AND ON!

No! No more sequels! GET NEW IDEAS!... or ask me I have some... And do not make any more sequels to The Rescuers... What a horrible humiliation... Give us Song of the South and get rid of The Rescuers Down Under... And don't make "The Rescuers Up Above" ( ) .

Tangela wrote:

Prince Adam wrote:Stop the "cheapquels", and begin proper, Feature Animation seqeuls. *BUT NOT TO WALT'S FILMS! JUST THE ONES FROM 1967 AND ON!

No! No more sequels! GET NEW IDEAS!... or ask me I have some... And do not make any more sequels to The Rescuers... What a horrible humiliation... Give us Song of the South and get rid of The Rescuers Down Under... And don't make "The Rescuers Up Above" ( ) .

Yeah! I actually agree that the "sequels" are a really important part of the business. They are required to keep the money flowing in, while they work on whatever their latest 3D project is.

Plus, as we are seeing with the Three Musketeers, more original concepts are coming out of this division, as well as the kind of creativity we were seeing from the House 10-15 years ago. Give the DisneyToon people more time and money, and watch the magic happen.

Remember people: "cheapquels" (I loathe that term) are keeping 2D animation alive.

What I would get them to change is this ridiculous policy of pandering to the two people a year who write letters, and give Disney "legitimate concern" to start editing and slicing large chunks out of their movies (or in the case of Song of the South, not release it at all). Who is to say in 20 years time someone won't find The Little Mermaid, The Lion King or Aladdin offensive, so people of the next generations will never see these films? Ridiculous, yes. But it could happen.

Disney needs to take a hard-line policy of art integrity over outside pressure, or else future generations will possibly lose the chance of ever see these classics.

Stopping the terrible sequals as mentioned would help a lot, but they should also get Pixar back and make another negotiation. If they get ride of Eisner I bet Pixar would come back to the Mouse.

They should also hire a great new CEO and Chaiman of the Board and one of them should be thinking economics and the other should think of artistic choices. If you want to get Disney back on track you should follow the winning teame like Walt and Roy was in their time. Just look at what happened when Walt died and Roy took over, and I can only imagine the opposit where Walt were able to do whatever he wanted, he would be broke in a few years.

karlsen wrote:Stopping the terrible sequals as mentioned would help a lot...

Sorry to pick on you, Karlsen, but seeing as you were the last to mention it...

HOW do you think stopping sequels would make Disney better? How would it "help"?

And just so I'm not unfairly picking on Karlsen, how does everyone else feel? And I don't mean just the "sequels suck, they ruin the original" argument.

Personally, I think they are necessary, and quite a good little earner for the company.

Anyhoo, just curious...

First things first - get Pixar back and new management. Then, I think it would be fine to completely END sequels, because the TOON department can come up with creativity. Also, bring back 2D, but also do 3D, so Disney fans can have many choices to choose from. The parks need work, obviously. I'd love to see some new Muppet movies from Disney, and above all, I want ALL Disney movies to be released in their original aspect ratio!!! Perhaps it would be nice if movies wouldn't go out of print, and maybe for once they could keep the titles the same (like all animated movies being "Platinum" and all live-action titles being "Vault Disney" or whatever...)

Hook

I don't mind the sequels. I don't necessarily...watch many of them, or get many of them, but I understand Disney is a business, and what with all the competition in the animated field (and the movie field in general), it's good income for them, I'm sure. And people do enjoy them and buy them, otherwise they would stop making them. But there seems to be an over-abundance of sequels, and I don't think such an overload is healthy. They may be profitable, but the people running the company should be aiming for more than profit...

I thought The Rescuers Down Under was their best sequel. And, to me, it looks (and simply is, all-around) better than all of their DTV sequels today. And it was released 14 years ago. (But I haven't really seen the Lion King sequels, admittedly.) They took the time with that one...and theatrically released it. I know it (RDU) didn't do extremely well at the box office, but was pretty big on video (which probably inspired them to make their sequels direct to video from then on), but...to me, it's not the fact that they're doing sequels, it's that they're doing too many, too fast, and they rarely (if ever) live up to the films that spawned them. Maybe they need more time, more money, a theatrical push...but they need to alter the way they put out sequels.

I hope, as Lilo & Stitch is my favorite film, that its sequel (which they are releasing theatrically, aren't they) is done well, in terms of story and animation. But, knowing that the original production crew (most of them, anyway) got the sack, I'll admit to being wary...

I think they need to stabilize the state of traditional feature animation, which is obviously in a state of flux. Shutting down Orlando was a bad move, in my book. Lilo & Stitch proved that such films could catch on, be hits, but I think they got spooked when Treasure Planet did so horribly. But Brother Bear came back...and did pretty well, I thought (doing so despite the reviews, which...don't even know why they were so vicious there). Anyway, Orlando's three films...all did well. They were reliable. I don't know why...the management felt the need to shut them down.

Them doing 3D, computer-animated films is fine...but they need to have a mix. Some traditional films, some computer films. Always have films of both types...in development. They're releasing more than one film a year right now, as it is, so they could, say, release one traditional and one computer-animated film a year...or something. But I am certain there is room for both. Their heritage rests in traditional films, and those are their best, most-loved films...so they shouldn't shy away from the medium simply because of some absurd notion that they're box office poison. Or because the going's getting tough.

So, yeah, I think, off the top of my head...that they need to adjust the way they throw around their sequels, stabilize traditional animation and be patient with it, to nurture it back to the level that computer animation is at (or near it). And, also, I think they need to do a better job with their Disney Stores. The ones in Indiana (of the three I've been to) are great, but I do wish they had a wider selection of things (especially clothing). I love their plushes, though. And I don't think they're closing any here, but the fact that they've had to close many elsewhere...makes me think they need to invest more energy into that.

As for ABC/ESPN, et cetera, I can't say I really watch the network (for the Indy Car races, I do, and things like the Academy Awards, but not much else). Of, course, I don't watch a lot of TV, necessarily (right now, the only show I watch is "24," and it's on FOX). So I don't know what to say about that...

About Pixar. I thought both companies worked in a sort of symbiosis, stronger together than apart. It just developed into that situation, but I also understand how big Pixar's been getting (with hit after hit), and maybe Disney could've tried harder to keep them, been a little more...cooperative, but in my opinion, I think Pixar's getting a big big-headed. Or at least too sure of themselves. I understand they've had smooth sailing with their five films, but...well, I don't know. I guess it was Steve Jobs comments about Brother Bear and other Disney films, that kind of irked me. But that's just him.

But I don't think Disney needs to be making a Toy Story 3 at all. As for the parks, I've never been to them (never been to Florida or California at all, even). The closest I come is The Disney Store.

Disney's been in states of flux, in various sorts of dark ages before, so I'm confident that, eventually, they will come out of it. But they need to work on things, yeah. As for management, I like Roy (and what he did with Fantasia 2000, especially), but I've never...had a disliking for Eisner, necessarily. I don't agree with some of the things he and the company have done (sacking the Orlando animation facility, et cetera, et cetera), but maybe a change of leadership would be good...

I personally am glad that they might be quitting the Sequels! Yeah but their is one really good sequel that was made after Walt's Death and that was Return From Witch Mountain!

Jack wrote:The problems at Disneyland have become more apparent to me the more times I visit: structures that need repair, whole areas that need to be filled (that lake used for the Submarine Voyage ride is sitting in Tomorrowland like a bump on a log).

Same thing on this side of the country. The 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (Which my mother used to call 20,000 Submarines ) ride has been an empty lake with a rusty statue of Triton ( I think) ever since 1995ish. I've never ridden it and I was really sad that its taking so long to replace it. For the Disneyland Submarine Voyage, there was plans for an Atlantis themed ride! That sounds so awesome!

They are improving the parks though. I know at Animal Kingdom they are building a Mount Everest for a new and exciting rollercoaster. Mission: SPACE at EPCOT is wonderful and definitely what makes the ticket price worth it! The exciting car stunt show at DIsney Studios in Paris is being built at MGM. At the Magic Kingdom, they have the new 3D show Philharmagic, which I heard is really good, a less scary Alien Encounter with Stitch, and what makes me upset and very curious: a total makeover for "it's a small world." My sister is working at WDW (at Pooh, Snow White, and Mad Tea Party to be exact) and she said that they are closing "it's a small world" for a year starting the end of March to "update" it, whatever that means. I think the ride is fine and charming now and an "update" would be like making a sequel to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs!

Anyhow, that's what Disney is fixing now and I hope they continue to (except "updating" Walt's World Fair attractions!).

p.s. anyone else in favor for a Theme Parks forum? Are whole new forums A LOT of bandwidth?

Kram Nebuer wrote:Same thing on this side of the country. The 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (Which my mother used to call 20,000 Submarines ) ride has been an empty lake with a rusty statue of Triton ( I think) ever since 1995ish.

At least they put something in that lake. The one in Disneyland has nothing in it, aside from leftovers of the submarine ride underwater. They aren't doing anything with the submarine lake, and it makes that part of the park look barren and cheap.

I believe its because of the low budget - if it were higher, I'm sure they would have filled it with something by now, in addition to repairing other areas of the park. Instead of giving more money to Disneyland for useful purposes, huge bonuses of money go to the head honchos at the Disney company that they don't need at all.

Jack wrote:Hmm, well I'd say when it comes to shareholder value, ABC is what needs to be fixed first and foremost.

But the priority in my eyes is: A) Bring traditional animation back, B) Fix the theme parks.

The problems at Disneyland have become more apparent to me the more times I visit: structures that need repair, whole areas that need to be filled (that lake used for the Submarine Voyage ride is sitting in Tomorrowland like a bump on a log), and employees that need to be properly trained (on other words, lessen the accidents like the one that recently occured at Walt Disney World).

I totally agree! They need to focus on the theme parks making them safe and not for the safe buck. They could still have that submarine ride but no they have to take it out and now what NOTHING! Its all Eisner's falut!

For one thing:

Disney should put an end to sweatshop labor. I've always loved visiting their Disney store (and other stores with Disney clothing merchandise, minus Wal-Mart), but I never, ever buy them.

LOOMIS,

You said you want to know what is wrong with chequils. Well don't listen to any of us here, get the explaination from Roy Disney's website savedisney.com it's explained there better than we could ever do it.

Disney Sequels: Blanding the "Brand"
http://www.savedisney.com/vision/editor ... 2704.1.asp

As for the save Disney "brand" post, well, like satistics, their rules for sequels can be used for anything. I don't think it proves anything really. Plus, they dramatically undersell Return to Neverland (for example). They can complain about formulas as much as they want, but it doesn't alter the fact that Return to Neverland has a coherent story and an arc for the main character, which is something the original Peter Pan never had. Plus the actual moral seems to be better too.

Take out the parent and the child categories, and their "sequel formula categories" also sum up most Disney animated films anyway.

And if repeating formulas are cause for concern, why no bashing of Pixar. Roy seems to have a "get Pixar back at any cost" mentality, despite the fact they use repetetive formula storytelling and would continue to take the publics attention off the proper Walt Disney Feature Animation (and more importantly any money co-earned with Disney's help would only make Pixar a stronger rival when they did decide to leave Disney and strike out on their own).

Disney have done three things wrong with the sequels, not none of the mistakes have been the actual decision to make sequels.

The biggest mistake is most of the sequels are disappointing. I can't deny that. But I do think that they are getting better. So that's mistake 1 being delt with.

The second is that they release things like Tarzan and Jane and Atlantis: Milo's Return with the same branding as 101 Dalmations II and The Lion King 1 1/2. The episodic TV cartoon compilations are not sequels and should never have been presented as such. Bad Disney! So far, it doesn't look like mistake 2 is being delt with.

The third mistake is releasing the sequels to the theaters. While I do think Return to Neverland is vastly better than the original Peter Pan, releasing it to the theater does just confuse the issue. I think it's okay to release Teacher's Pet to the theater because its clearly a TV show spin-off.

As for sequels having tired plots and cheap animation, it sounds to me a bit like Disney in the 70's. Let's take a look back at that period of "Disney Greatness". Several films using the same character designs (Jungle Book, Bedknob and Broomsticks and Robin Hood). They even got Phil Harris to play the identically drawn bears in both Jungle Book and Robin Hood. Oh, and talking of Robin Hood, not only did it reuse animation from other films (most famously the dance from Snow White), it also reused animation from itself several times! Isn't that a trick only cheap TV cartoons use?

Nobody demanded that Disney stopped making animated films after these releases, so why demand the sequels stop now. All that's needed is what was needed for Feature Animation in the 70's. More love, care and attention.

Yes, critisise a "classic" on this board and all hell breaks out, even if your pointing out the truth. The origin of the story or where the movie was animated do not automatically make one film better than another. Only the final film does.

Remember when everybody here was complaining about the lack-of-originality in making a Pirates of the Caribbean film? Well, it quickly became number 2 on this boards Live Action Top Ten, so it looks like Disney did manage to make a decent movie from a tired idea.

Then we also get comments like "make sequels to the new films, but leave Walt's alone". Why? Why should they be off limits. Most are from other peoples stories anyway (which incidently Walt altered). Walt's films are nothing more than copies of the original stories, so why not copy them? Walt may or my not have liked a sequel to The Jungle Book, but why should Walt have more respects shown to him than he showed to the original source? Do you think Kipling would be happy with Disney's Jungle Book?

As long as the stories good then any film is open to a seq-mid-pre-quel.

People here are already complaining about Bambi II when they know nothing about it. Have any screenshots been shown? Does anyone know the story? Disney have a wonderful opportunity to tell a touching tale of coming of age and also include a environmental message. Bambi II could be moving and educational. It could be funny and bittersweet. It could be thrilling and exciting. It could be lots of things because, as it stands, nobody knows.

The only important factor is; the story must be good. Hopefully Disney are learning this now.

Oh and while I'm at it, do the sequels really dilute the brand? There's only been a small handful. And if the sequels dilute the brand, does releasing a live action Lizzie McQuire movie dilute Disney's live action branding? Nobody really expected the Lizzie McQuire movie to be the same level of production as Pirates of the Caribbean. Does anyone here think people won't go and see any more Disney live action movies because they saw Lizze McQuire and thought it sucked? So why does everyone assume the public expects all Disney animated films to have the same production values? Especially when Disney make no attempt to hide the fact that (most) are direct to video releases only?

Disney sequels are not the major problem for turning away from 2D animation. I doubt that they're even 10% of the reason. Only in people's dreams will stopping the sequels begin a new age for 2D animation.

simple... stop sequels, bring back 2d... and have ABC air something interesting. And the creative people should be in charge of Disney Feature Animation... not executives to whom it's all about the bottom line. You can't just buy and sell talent, so it will be hard to bring back 2d, but it's not impossible

(1) Put out a quality 2-D broadway-style musical with huge emotional appeal. People will love it. I REFUSE to believe that the company just lost ability after TLK and we're doomed to sub-par films.

(2)Fix ABC. They need to come up with some very creative programming, a couple sitcoms, and one or two blockbuster dramas. Then they need to get some sort of huge event that everyone will watch (the Oscars was a big missed opportunity), and run ads for it the whole time. This will get the word out to everyone that ABC has some good stuff coming out. And they should catch a couple of big stars as well (no, Kelly Rippa is not a big star).

(3)Promote the new attractions at the parks big-time, and promote them as being magical. In order to effectively do this, make them magical!!!! Bring back characters (3 or 4 strolling around the park for a few hours and then catching a quick bus to Epcot doesn't cut it). Beef up Animal Kingdom. Bring something HUGE to California adventure, along with 3 or 4 WDW favorites over there as well. Use the new-found muppet property in MGM. And yes, do SOMETHING with the 20,000 Leagues lagoon in Fantasyland, it's totally useless. WHAT ABOUT THE LITTLE MERMAID DARK RIDE IDEA???

(4)Look back at Fox Family programming, and do EXACTLY what they did for ABC Family. Nothing had to change.

(5)Apologize to Hilary Duff and get her back on board.

(6)Release Song of the South and Golden Girls on DVD. Both of these will sale very well.

(7)Bring in some programming that will distinguish Disney channel morning shows from Nickelodeon and PBS.

(8)Look back at Disney Store inventory from 5 years ago. Do that again.

-Aaron

awallaceunc wrote:(1) Put out a quality 2-D broadway-style musical with huge emotional appeal. People will love it. I REFUSE to believe that the company just lost ability after TLK and we're doomed to sub-par films.

(2)Fix ABC. They need to come up with some very creative programming, a couple sitcoms, and one or two blockbuster dramas. Then they need to get some sort of huge event that everyone will watch (the Oscars was a big missed opportunity), and run ads for it the whole time. This will get the word out to everyone that ABC has some good stuff coming out. And they should catch a couple of big stars as well (no, Kelly Rippa is not a big star).

(3)Promote the new attractions at the parks big-time, and promote them as being magical. In order to effectively do this, make them magical!!!! Bring back characters (3 or 4 strolling around the park for a few hours and then catching a quick bus to Epcot doesn't cut it). Beef up Animal Kingdom. Bring something HUGE to California adventure, along with 3 or 4 WDW favorites over there as well. Use the new-found muppet property in MGM. And yes, do SOMETHING with the 20,000 Leagues lagoon in Fantasyland, it's totally useless. WHAT ABOUT THE LITTLE MERMAID DARK RIDE IDEA???

(4)Look back at Fox Family programming, and do EXACTLY what they did for ABC Family. Nothing had to change.

(5)Apologize to Hilary Duff and get her back on board.

(6)Release Song of the South and Golden Girls on DVD. Both of these will sale very well.

(7)Bring in some programming that will distinguish Disney channel morning shows from Nickelodeon and PBS.

(8)Look back at Disney Store inventory from 5 years ago. Do that again.

-Aaron

I like 3 5 and 8 Good ideas!

Thanks. Ooh, and we should have Home Improvement on DVD

-Aaron