Why dislike for Iger?

[celluloid]

Marc Davis Fan, I feel that has a lot more to do with Islands of Adventure and Universal's Growth post trust in great design and competition. If anything Iger Stifled it until they had to do something.

 

[olinecoach61]

Anyone seen the stock prices lately? The man is making the company money. I certainly don't like what has been done with the parks but overall I think he has been successful.

 

[larryz]

He's done a wonderful job. He was the right man at the right time for TWDC.

They misspelled "bought."

 

[larryz]

This is am important thing to remember. Without Iger taking over, we might never have seen anything at the level of quality, scale, or innovation as Pandora, Cars Land, or Galaxy's Edge. Ever again.

Re-imagine Pandora as Endor and the FoP Banshees as speeder bikes... and you wonder why they didn't just go ahead and build a Star Wars gate with 5 lands instead of one land with 2 rides and an entire merchandising department.

 

[justintheharris]

Not accurate about Maelstrom. The lines were nearly always packed. As for the aforementioned, the originals were people eating omnimovers that could load thousands per hour with minimal wait. Of course the originals would be dated and in need of being modernized, but their quality was superb. If you think Mission: Space is on the same level of quality and storytelling that Horizons was, then Bob Iger has done an amazing job in selling Kool-Aid.

Did you forget Mission:Space is an Eisner era ride? And even with that being said, I actually do prefer Mission:Space, a sophisticated space flight simulator unlike anything else in the world, than Horizons, an omnimover that might’ve told a cool story in 1988. Next, Maelstrom was never packed. Third, are you seriously suggesting that being an omnimover made them good rides? That’s a ridiculous premise. Not many people in the general public loved EPCOT in its original form. It’s everyones nostalgia.

 

[Shouldigo12]

The creativity of the Disney studios is lacking, Incredibles 2, Ralph breaks the internet and the live action "cheap CGI" movies are mediocre at best. Disney CEOs usually start really strong and end up doing a poor job at the end (exclude Walt).

See, this is what I was talking about.
Incredibles 2
Imdb: 7.7/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 94%
Metacritic: 8-%
Ralph 2
Box office: 1.243 billion
IMDB: 71./10
RT: 88%
Metacritc: 71%
Box office- 528.3 million
Cinderella
IMDB:6.9/10
rt: 84%
Box office: 543.5 million
Roger Ebert: 3/4
Beauty and The Beast
IMDB: 7.2/10
RT: 71%
Facebook: 4.3/5
Box office: 1.264 billion
Sure, those aren't masterpiece level scores, but all in all those movies you listed got some pretty good reviews. Personal opinions aside, I think it's difficult to make the argument that creativity is lacking and their new movies aren't any good. These movies are not a good example of how Iger isn't doing a good job, because these movies were successes from a critical and financial point of view.

 

[MaryJaneP]

FWIW, being called a "great businessman" is probably the most damning description of a person who finagled their way into leading a creative enterprise. Understanding and improving the bottom line is not mutually exclusive to excellence that was WDW and TDC. And to further confuse those who take the time to read and think about some of these posts, including this one, Yes, the price of a park ticket could be lowered while at the same time guest crowding could be reduced. Of course, this is a trail that nobody wants to head down.

 

[Rumrunner]

Walt Disney's vision was centered around family, wholesome entertainment, tradition, and values.

Eisner and Iger's vision did not value those things near as much.

Their success came from the foundation laid by Walt. It takes no genius to make money with the Disney legacy.

 

[bigrigross]

Walt Disney's vision was centered around family, wholesome entertainment, tradition, and values.

Eisner and Iger's vision did not value those things near as much.

Their success came from the foundation laid by Walt. It takes no genius to make money with the Disney legacy.

Walts legacy almost put the company in a place for a hostile takeover. Eisner got the company on a solid footing and made the disney brand what it is today. The first thing people think of when you hear disney is Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, and Little Mermaid. All made during the Eisner tenure. In fact, Disney made their best movies during his time at Disney as proven by their box office numbers.

Everyone wants to complain about IP yet Disney barely had any IPs when Disneyland and Disneyworld was built and opened. At least any IPs that had worldwide renown (fox and the hound was a great movie, but you dont see it talked about). You pretty much have Snow White, Cinderalla and Mickey. It wasnt until the 90's Disney got their IP portfolio of great movies. If Disney had a larger number of IPs at the time, we would have seen more IP related rides in the parks when they opened. Thing is, they didnt so they had to create ones for the rides.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

See, this is what I was talking about.
Incredibles 2
Imdb: 7.7/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 94%
Metacritic: 8-%
Ralph 2
Box office: 1.243 billion
IMDB: 71./10
RT: 88%
Metacritc: 71%
Box office- 528.3 million
Cinderella
IMDB:6.9/10
rt: 84%
Box office: 543.5 million
Roger Ebert: 3/4
Beauty and The Beast
IMDB: 7.2/10
RT: 71%
Facebook: 4.3/5
Box office: 1.264 billion
Sure, those aren't masterpiece level scores, but all in all those movies you listed got some pretty good reviews. Personal opinions aside, I think it's difficult to make the argument that creativity is lacking and their new movies aren't any good. These movies are not a good example of how Iger isn't doing a good job, because these movies were successes from a critical and financial point of view.

Ralf 2 was terrible

 

[Brer Oswald]

I don’t hate the man. I’m rather neutral on him. He’s done a lot of good for the company...and a lot of bad. The thing that annoys me the most however is his ego. It feels like he and his team only care about and acknowledge the last 15 years of Disney, almost as if the 75+ other years didn’t exist.

 

[drizgirl]

See, this is what I was talking about.
Incredibles 2
Imdb: 7.7/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 94%
Metacritic: 8-%
Ralph 2
Box office: 1.243 billion
IMDB: 71./10
RT: 88%
Metacritc: 71%
Box office- 528.3 million
Cinderella
IMDB:6.9/10
rt: 84%
Box office: 543.5 million
Roger Ebert: 3/4
Beauty and The Beast
IMDB: 7.2/10
RT: 71%
Facebook: 4.3/5
Box office: 1.264 billion
Sure, those aren't masterpiece level scores, but all in all those movies you listed got some pretty good reviews. Personal opinions aside, I think it's difficult to make the argument that creativity is lacking and their new movies aren't any good. These movies are not a good example of how Iger isn't doing a good job, because these movies were successes from a critical and financial point of view.

Don't care. I'm sick to death of remakes and sequels. Break some new ground already please. It's like they think all the new ideas have been taken or something.

 

[eliza61nyc]

FWIW, being called a "great businessman" is probably the most damning description of a person who finagled their way into leading a creative enterprise. Understanding and improving the bottom line is not mutually exclusive to excellence that was WDW and TDC. And to further confuse those who take the time to read and think about some of these posts, including this one, Yes, the price of a park ticket could be lowered while at the same time guest crowding could be reduced. Of course, this is a trail that nobody wants to head down.

How?? serious question. I hear that a lot, that they could easily lower the ticket prices and lower the crowds, so I am interested in knowing how they would do that. with the rides they have now. They are not building so called "people eaters" so please don't say that, let's deal in reality, with what we have.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Don't care. I'm sick to death of remakes and sequels. Break some new ground already please. It's like they think all the new ideas have been taken or something.

Unfortunately that is all hollywood not exclusive to Disney. I went to see "little" this weekend, cute movie but basically it's body swapping theme has been done a number of times. My kids went to see Hellboy, again what is this the 3rd one?

As you can tell by my avatar, I loved, loved loved both Incredibles.

 

[drizgirl]

How?? serious question. I hear that a lot, that they could easily lower the ticket prices and lower the crowds, so I am interested in knowing how they would do that. with the rides they have now. They are not building so called "people eaters" so please don't say that, let's deal in reality, with what we have.

But WHY aren't they building "people eaters"? The decision to build lower or higher capacity attractions is entirely within Disney's control.

 

[drizgirl]

Unfortunately that is all hollywood not exclusive to Disney. I went to see "little" this weekend, cute movie but basically it's body swapping theme has been done a number of times. My kids went to see Hellboy, again what is this the 3rd one?

As you can tell by my avatar, I loved, loved loved both Incredibles.

So are all the good ideas used up now? Disney should be a leader, so it shouldn't matter that's what everyone else is doing.

 

[Brer Oswald]

But WHY aren't they building "people eaters"? The decision to build lower or higher capacity attractions is entirely within Disney's control.

I think the main reason is because they are much harder to make. It’s much easier to make quick, high octane attractions that entertain guests than it is to make lengthy, high capacity attractions that do the same thing. Cheaper too. You can manage to pull off less detailed effects when guests don’t have enough time to analyze them.

 

[drizgirl]

I think the main reason is because they are much harder to make. It’s much easier to make quick, high octane attractions that entertain guests than it is to make lengthy, high capacity attractions that do the same thing. Cheaper too. You can manage to pull off less detailed effects when guests don’t have enough time to analyze them.

And the budget is also a choice that Disney makes. The parks produce high profit margins for Disney. They are just making a choice not to make high capacity a priority when adding new things to the parks.

 

[eliza61nyc]

But WHY aren't they building "people eaters"? The decision to build lower or higher capacity attractions is entirely within Disney's control.

I have no idea but again the why isn't important, at least not right now, the fact is with all the money they are dumping into SWGE and GoTG, they are not going to suddenly rip that out and design something different.
That's what I mean in dealing in reality, we can postulate all day long on why they are doing what they are doing but how do you lower park attendance WITH what we will have for the next say 5 years.

 

[eliza61nyc]

So are all the good ideas used up now? Disney should be a leader, so it shouldn't matter that's what everyone else is doing.

No, Wreck it Ralph and Incredobles are still great ideas. Sequels does not automatically mean bad idea. Both were original. Toy story is a great series that has consistently had good sequels.