A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

[HauntedPirate]

If we have questions or doubts about whether or not a movie is appropriate for our kids (ages 10-17), I or we will go see it first.

 

[rle4lunch]

Well...wouldn't you be offended if somebody came up to you and told you to redo your work to the level of a four year old?

"And for this course our chef went out of his way to base this Japanese meal on fresh..." "Yo buddy, my three year old doesn't eat that. Add some ketchup and fries"

"Here's the new article I've written about our new local government and..." "My four year old doesn't understand that. Please rewrite in simple language"

I think Bird is admirably restrained. Although I understand the point that some leeway ought to be given because too often Disney has caved in and remade their product for pre-schoolers, to the point where parents think Disney / Pixar / WDW / the MK is toddler territory.

You know, George Lucas wrote the SW prequels to be dumbed down to pre-teen levels and look what we got, crap. Look what he got, warranted backlash and an eventual end to his reign of CGI terror.

When you're writing a PG movie (Not 'G'), you're not aiming for 4 year olds. You're aiming at a movie that is acceptable for younglings, but they're not necessarily going to 'get it'. And that's okay.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Well...wouldn't you be offended if somebody came up to you and told you to redo your work to the level of a four year old?

"And for this course our chef went out of his way to base this Japanese meal on fresh..." "Yo buddy, my three year old doesn't eat that. Add some ketchup and fries"

"Here's the new article I've written about our new local government and..." "My four year old doesn't understand that. Please rewrite in simple language"

I think Bird is admirably restrained. Although I understand the point that some leeway ought to be given because too often Disney has caved in and remade their product for pre-schoolers, to the point where parents think Disney / Pixar / WDW / the MK is toddler territory.

I said it before and I'll say it again. The dad was in the wrong and Bird's feelings are understandable. The problem is that Bird should've explained his side of the argument better than an oversimplified "no kids allowed" response.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Looks like Disney Animals® will be the next brand for marketing to push. I guess they finally realized that some of their most consistently popular movies (Bambi, Dumbo, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians etc) don't fit into the categories of "Princess" or "Star Wars".

 

[Cesar R M]

I said it before and I'll say it again. The dad was in the wrong and Bird's feelings are understandable. The problem is that Bird should've explained his side of the argument better than an oversimplified "no kids allowed" response.

Except he didnt say so? you're mixing the 2 different replies he gave to 2 different persons.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Except he didnt say so? you're mixing the 2 different replies he gave to 2 different persons.

His responses to both have essentially the same meaning, so my point still stands.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Looks like Disney Animals® will be the next brand for marketing to push. I guess they finally realized that some of their most consistently popular movies (Bambi, Dumbo, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians etc) don't fit into the categories of "Princess" or "Star Wars".

I don't have a problem with Disney Animals coming to DAK, but I know many who view it as an abomination. This is the first step to the abominable.

 

[Rodan75]

I don't have a problem with Disney Animals coming to DAK, but I know many who view it as an abomination. This is the first step to the abominable.

Aren't most of the animals already considered 'ok' for DAK by most of the hard core fans? I think the only problem child is Zootopia.

 

[doctornick]

Aren't most of the animals already considered 'ok' for DAK by most of the hard core fans? I think the only problem child is Zootopia.

The Robin Hood characters would also be in the "problem child" boat. Ironically, Mickey and friends don't really fit either but them going away isn't going to happen.

I think most people are okay with cartoon animals in DAK as long as they are represented as "real" animals that we simply are able to understand/communicate with.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Aren't most of the animals already considered 'ok' for DAK by most of the hard core fans?

Oh, no. Got to be real animals. And exotic. And jungle and/or tropical. You know, more of the same.

Domesticated animals and common animals, especially if they're cartoony talking types aren't allowed.

[Puts a big plant in front of Lion King and Bug's Life before anyone notices them.]

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Aren't most of the animals already considered 'ok' for DAK by most of the hard core fans? I think the only problem child is Zootopia.

Depends. A “Disney Animals” parade is fine, but a characterfied version of RoL or attractions/lands devoted to Jungle Book or Zootopia is not.

Just because it has animals doesn’t mean it fits with the theme and mission statement of the park.

 

[geekza]

It's already been established here that PG doesn't necessarily mean what it used to.

Heck, I'm old enough to remember full frontal nudity in PG films. Not that I used to search the HBO Guide as a child to look for such things. Heavens, no.

 

[Mike S]

Looks like Disney Animals® will be the next brand for marketing to push. I guess they finally realized that some of their most consistently popular movies (Bambi, Dumbo, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians etc) don't fit into the categories of "Princess" or "Star Wars".

Isn’t Lion King next year? Well played Disney.

 

[MisterPenguin]

We need someone to create a Disney Animals as Disney Princesses portrait, stat!

 

[Pixieish]

His responses to both have essentially the same meaning, so my point still stands.

I'm old school and evil. I was glad to see someone in Hollywood finally giving these "but my kid doesn't feel included" participation-trophy-giving people some straight, hard, unlikable truth. Seems to me they could use more of it.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Isn’t Lion King next year? Well played Disney.

And Dumbo. Can't be a coincidence.

 

[TiggerDad]

I don't have a problem with Disney Animals coming to DAK, but I know many who view it as an abomination. This is the first step to the abominable.

The abominable is already in DAK


inside Everest.

 

[brb1006]

Looks like Disney Animals® will be the next brand for marketing to push. I guess they finally realized that some of their most consistently popular movies (Bambi, Dumbo, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians etc) don't fit into the categories of "Princess" or "Star Wars".

Finally a new brand that's unisex!

 

[brb1006]

Isn’t Lion King next year? Well played Disney.

I'm going to speculate Disney's Streaming Service coming in late 2019. Might have categories for certain Disney original movies or shows exclusive to the service separated by three brands. (Disney Princess which are focused on the female princesses, Star Wars, and Disney Animals geared towards movies and films focused on characters such as Dumbo, The Aristocats, and Lady and the Tramp). Hopefully Disney might revisit The Aristocats animated series idea from 2003 before it got cancelled along with one series that was supposed to star Thumper from the 80's.

 

[Princess Leia]

I'm going to speculate Disney's Streaming Service coming in late 2019. Might have categories for certain Disney original movies or shows exclusive to the service decided by three brands. (Disney Princess which are focused on the female princesses, Star Wars, and Disney Animals geared towards movies and films focused on characters such as Dumbo, The Aristocats, and Lady and the Tramp).

You’re probably right about this. I’d add Marvel to the mix too.