They need to stick to the roots.

[Sleeping Beauty 5]

I think Walt would want to see Disney's movie making expand to be as inclusive as possible. His goal with the parks was to create a place everyone in the family come could and have fun. Shouldn't the principle be the same with the movies? For a large part of the young audience, at a certain age, even the pixar movies seem too-childish. So Disney draws the families in with National Treasure and such. I find that very Disney-like.

I couldn't agree more Calypso. What Disney really needs to do if they want to continue with Walt's ambition is to keep making top notch movies that everyone in your family can enjoy. Well said!

[Captain Schnemo]

You can't keep repeating the Disney movies over and over. They do need original programming.

Of course, but...

And there is nothing about "Hannah Montana" or "Corey in the House" that isn't "family" entertainment.

...is that a joke? These shows, along with nearly everything else on the Disney Channel these days, are absolutely unwatchable for adults.

Not everyone is going to enjoy all kinds of shows, but of the movies you listed that were made when Walt was alive, most of them were entertaining to adults who were interested in the genre. There was an attempt to appeal to both children and adults. Davy Crockett is a classic example of a show kids liked that is clever and engaging to adults as well.

Anyone over the age of 13 who can sit through more than 30 seconds of "That's So Raven" without attempting suicide needs to have their head examined. And issues of taste aside, there is no attempt to make that show interesting to anyone other than tween girls. That's a pretty specific market.

I will agree that a number of the films on your list sucked, but most of the ones with extremely limited appeal were made after Walt's death.

The company acknowledged this as a problem and so made Tron in an effort to bring some "magic" back to the company. Despite being a groundbreaking film with some amazing music and effects...it's not very good. But the point is that it was attempt at a "real" movie, not a "children's" movie. It reminds me a lot of 20K Leagues, actually, in that the filmmakers had made amazing technological achievements, although not all elements were quite up to par.

Anyway, the point is not that Disney didn't previously make movies that had more appeal to certain sections of the population (some of the princess movies are essentially "girl" movies), but that there was the potential for multiple generations to enjoy the same show simultaneously...much like their theme parks.

[WVParkfan]

These shows, along with nearly everything else on the Disney Channel these days, are absolutely unwatchable for adults.

That's an opinion. I respect your opinion, but that's what it is. Not a fact. I'm sure there are some parents who can watch "Little Einsteins." I cannot, but that doesn't make it "absolutely unwatchable."

Society has changed since Walt's death. An example: with over 800 TV channels available on DirecTV, each must specialize to appeal to a specific audience. The Food Network, ESPN, CNN, Cartoon Network... none of those were created to appeal to everyone.

I think Walt would be proud that the Company isn't falling behind, and is constantly striving to reach both broad markets, and individual ones. That's true also in the Parks. Height requirements, shows or rides modeled after specific movies or TV shows, etc. are all proof that the Disney company understands how things have changed, and how to keep up. Thank God, or we'd be stuck with Davy Crockett adventures and Jungle Cruise rides (and Disney would be out of business).

[luv2cthemouse]

I disagree. I like Disney cartoons, but I like a real movie with humans in it sometimes too.

[Captain Schnemo]

I respect your opinion, but that's what it is.

While it's my opinion that any sane adult would find most Disney Channel programming unbearable, it's not an opinion to say that these shows are not created with an adult audience in mind. That's the important point.

I think Walt would be proud that the Company isn't falling behind...

First of all, the premise that all channels must target niche markets is flawed. All you have to do to dispel that idea is to look at the most popular ones (ABC, CBS, NBC, HBO, etc.).

More importantly, the garbage being spewed out of the Disney Channel isn't just different or newer, it's fundamentally un-Disney. It takes the basic premise of all Disney entertainment, turns it inside out and vomits inside it. It's insulting.

Disney, the company, has branched into all sorts of un-Disney entertainment, but it's not necessary to spoil the Disney brand. They can sell bloody, violent films under other labels, but I think you'd agree that it would be wrong to promote something like "Walt Disney's Hellraiser" or "Walt Disney's Grindhouse".

The Disney Channel's schedule is currently almost completely free of any sort of programming that is targeted at families.

[RREng77]

I haven't seen any references to one of Walt's biggest loves: nature. What of all his animal/nature shows that probably wouldn't make it today? I have to say I still like those, but they're certainly not for everyone.

That harkens to the point from WVParkfan: we now have specialized channels for nearly every segment of the population, and no longer have to cater to one huge audience. These advances in technology would certainly have affected Walt's actions, but still would not have stopped him...

[Captain Schnemo]

Good point on the nature shows. It's amazing what kind of range the Disneyland show got out of the "lands" theme.

True, it's not for everyone, but my father goes on and on about Meerkat Manor, as does my friend's kid. That's the kind of programming that's possible.