Disney's biggest blunder?

soccermouse · Post by **soccermouse** » Nov Tue 14, 2006 6:01 pm

Points well taken. We have ONLY been to Disneyland and love Autopia. Once my daughter is able to drive a REAL car next year, that might change for her.

I guess that I am also one of those sentimentalist that, in the case of Disneyland, would have a hard time getting rid of anything Walt 'touched' (although Walt himself did not have that problem). WDW of course may be a different story if 1) the Raceway is not as good and 2) because Walt never personally 'touched' it.

We can't wait for June when we can find out the 'good and bad' of what you have listed. Of course, we will be unable to compare it with what was before.

kronk's angel · Post by **kronk's angel** » Nov Thu 16, 2006 10:16 pm

I think they could shorten the autopia ride without losing too much of the feel/fun of the experience.

Soccermouse, a little warning: walking into the "other" Magic Kingdom the first time is a little surreal. So completely familiar, yet quite different... You feel like you know just which way you're going and then... wait, where am I?

Jacca5660 · Post by **Jacca5660** » Nov Fri 17, 2006 3:05 pm

EISNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Nov Wed 22, 2006 4:32 am

Jacca has won this thread!

Post by **spaulo** » Nov Wed 22, 2006 11:27 am

By force of will, it seems.

Mr.ToadWildRider · Post by **Mr.ToadWildRider** » Nov Wed 22, 2006 12:26 pm

Eisner wasn't as bad as people, primarily Disney nuts, make him out to be. I'd say that the real blunder wasn't having him, but having him stay beyond the point that a downward spiral began. He was quite good for the company for a while though...I mean it was his era that ushered in Aladdin,Beauty & The Beast, Lion King, The Little Mermaid etc. "New Classics." We also got new parks at WDW and DLR, granted, none of them feel like complete parks... I again think AK was a mistake, they should've used the money to develop MGM more and then waited for a fully planned park...now it feels like WDW has 2 full days, a 1/2 day, and a 1/3 day park. MGM is only full day for me because a) I don't favorpark hopping and I like to see Fantasmic and b) I could re-ride RnRC and ToT for the entire day I think.

Eisner brought the company up, but rather than bowing out gracefully when it became apparent his presence was beginning to hurt the company he stayed and a lot of the progress he helped make he helped to undo as well and that was the blunder.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Dec Fri 01, 2006 8:13 am

Anyone could have done what Eisner did. The "problem" with Disney when Eisner took over was that Disney was flush with cash and in danger of being bought out. So Eisner bought a lot of unrelated companies and simultaneously spread Disney too thin and overexposed the Disney name to the point that it lost all value.

The damage he's done would take decades to fix...and he's created culture in which it's unlikely that anyone is interested in doing so.

By the time the stockholders were upset with him, he'd already done irreparable damage to the parks and the Disney brand.

I'm not saying that nothing good managed to slide by on his watch, but I am saying that the Disney company I knew and loved is long dead, replaced by an evil doppleganger that sickens me, and I know who's responsible for it.

Um. Not that I'm bitter or anything.

Post by **spaulo** » Dec Fri 01, 2006 1:14 pm

Captain Schnemo wrote:an evil doppleganger that sickens me

For some reason, I never got this far with my disappointment in the Company. Can't say I blame you, though.

Blackie Pueblo · Post by **Blackie Pueblo** » Dec Fri 01, 2006 6:23 pm

I have to agree that the biggest blunder would have to be letting Eisner continue to lead as long as he did even while it was obvious his magic was gone.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"You can dream, create, design, and build the most wonderful place in the world, but it requires people to make the dream a reality."
--Walt Disney

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Dec Sat 02, 2006 11:35 am

spaulo wrote:
Captain Schnemo wrote:an evil doppleganger that sickens me
For some reason, I never got this far with my disappointment in the Company. Can't say I blame you, though.

As much as I like to complain, I really do hate feeling this way. The thing that depresses me the most is not the mediocrity of some of the recent Disney stuff. Not everything Walt did was a home run either.

What gets my goat is the stuff that runs absolutely counter to the core Disney tenets that made so many of us into fanboys in the first place. That crap on the Disney Channel is a perfect example. Although kids seem to love it, it's completely unwatchable drek for most adults. Part of the genius of Disney has always been its universal appeal. People of all ages, from smug elitists to those who are entertained by shiny objects have long appreciated classic Disney.

Contrast that with Davy Crockett, Donald Duck, the old Disneyland shows, or even the recent Disney "classics" like Lion King and it's apparent how un-Disney all that stuff is. And it's the whole friggin' channel. They won't even put the good stuff on any more.

And I've already ranted about how the founding principles of the parks have been violated. Just listen to Walt's Disneyland opening speech or the Epcot opening speech. These core values and ideas have been cast aside in the name of cheap, cynical, thoughtless garbage.

But, y'know, that's progress.

How ironic that Progressland got it so wrong...the future was really strip malls, McDonald's, and crass marketing.

Post by **subsonic** » Dec Tue 05, 2006 12:30 pm

I agree with Schnemo. It's been better recently, but for over a Decade now the decision makers at Disney really lost sight of the Family values. I think about the Goofy cartoons of past, we recently bought the Goofy DVD and still enjoyed it. Those information cartoons are the best. Other than Pixar films, the recent 2D films have no appeal.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Dec Wed 06, 2006 7:06 pm

I highly recommend the Tomorrowland collection. These shows are fantastic and really have the spirit of what Tomorrowland and Future World used to be about, before Disney gave up and turned one into a boring, generic, vaguely sci-fi themed land and the other into just a giant mish-mash of whoknowswhat.

The shows are incredibly entertaining, funny, intelligent, educational, and, most of all, optimistic, with absolutely no pandering at all. This is the Disney I fell in love with.

Also, I just caught this interview with Roy today about the release of all the old True-Life Adventures (there's a link to a review at the bottom of the page).

Within these two collections is the basis for the Discovery Channel -- hardcore futurist science plus nature documentaries. (Well, that is, before the Discovery Channel decided to put on all kinds of unrelated "women's programming" during the daytime, as well as a bunch of other nonsense.)

I particularly like this section of the review, which echoes a lot of what I'm yammering about all the time:

And as always, there are critics who decry the "Disneyfication" of the animals portrayed in the films, lamenting the anthropomorphizing effects of the editing, sound effects and music cues. But that's a view that's not born out by actually watching the films. Certainly, there are "cute" moments aplenty in the film; there's a high "Awwwww!" factor whenever the films show various baby animals at play. And there's nothing wrong with that; again, these films were meant to reach adults and children, and to entertain them, and those sequences are perhaps the best-remembered parts of the films. However, with all of the films, treated right up front in the narration and in the depiction of the battle for survival, is an unsentimental view of nature that imparts great respect for the animals and the processes of nature presented. Time and again, the films stress that nature is implacable in its disinterest; nature plays no favorites, and cute little animals die in the jaws of less cute animals. ... The True-Life Adventures show a decidedly realistic view of nature and its laws, in direct opposition to what Disney critics like to think Disney films are all about: sweetness, light, and fairy-tale endings. From beginning to end, these True-Life Adventure films firmly get the point across that nature has had its own rules from the beginning of time, and respect must come from that – because you're not going to change it. Animals are born, they fight for survival every day, and they die – usually at the hands of other predators. And these cycles, like the seasons, will continue forever. I hardly call that a saccharin outlook.

(Emphasis mine.)

I also have the Disney at War and Donald Duck collections and they are both pretty cool. Make me all misty-eyed for the past.

Disneys America · Post by **Disneys America** » Dec Fri 08, 2006 10:09 am

kronk's angel wrote:I knew a contractor who worked on Calif Adv., and he said everything was slapped together on the cheap. He was really bummed about how poorly planned the whole thing was, e.g., all the eating areas grouped together to save on plumbing costs(!).

Some parts of the CA park I thought were awesome, but the Bugs Life area was a lot like the Dino area in AK rdeacon mentioned, and could have been so cool with just a little more thought and work (like if the caterpillar train had circled around the area instead of just a small space, etc).

I agree with rdeacon about the stuff Walt hated... and don't get me started on the whole carnival "theming" at CA is actually anti-themed and... oh, forget it.

A copycat of Knotts was not what the world needed.

They should have done the "America" park with the Calif. stuff just a part of the entire park.

This made me laugh because that appears to be exactly what they did. The Disney's America "State Fair" became "Paradise Pier." The "Family Farm" became "Bountiful Valley Farm." "Victory Field" became "Condor Flats". The "Indian River Ride" became "Grizzly River Rapids". Obviously some things like the Civil War fort or Ellis Island didn't make it to DCA but it sure does appear that the imagineers recycled a lot of the plans for Disney's America when they designed DCA.

Esmeralda · Post by **Esmeralda** » Dec Fri 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Disneys America wrote:This made me laugh because that appears to be exactly what they did. The Disney's America "State Fair" became "Paradise Pier." The "Family Farm" became "Bountiful Valley Farm." "Victory Field" became "Condor Flats". The "Indian River Ride" became "Grizzly River Rapids". Obviously some things like the Civil War fort or Ellis Island didn't make it to DCA but it sure does appear that the imagineers recycled a lot of the plans for Disney's America when they designed DCA.

Are you referring to the park that never made it on the east coast because some people were outraged that it wasn't properly historic?

Post by **rdeacon** » Dec Sat 09, 2006 12:40 am

Esmeralda wrote:
Disneys America wrote:This made me laugh because that appears to be exactly what they did. The Disney's America "State Fair" became "Paradise Pier." The "Family Farm" became "Bountiful Valley Farm." "Victory Field" became "Condor Flats". The "Indian River Ride" became "Grizzly River Rapids". Obviously some things like the Civil War fort or Ellis Island didn't make it to DCA but it sure does appear that the imagineers recycled a lot of the plans for Disney's America when they designed DCA.
Are you referring to the park that never made it on the east coast because some people were outraged that it wasn't properly historic?

That would be it....

Rich