Mike S
Well-Known Member
It's amazing what it sounds like with a realistic audio.
Live action Aladdin sucks confirmed
It's amazing what it sounds like with a realistic audio.
It's nice to be missed. But life has been busy and chaotic and no real time to play, entertain and inform here of late.
...
...
On the Studios front, I am entertained everytime I hear how disappointed Iger has been with Rogue One and how much all of his changes (because he really didn't want a Star Wars movie that didn't feel like every other SW movie despite his claims to the contrary) and reshoots have cost.
And a live action Aladdin?!?! With no Robin Williams?!??! Do they have any creativity left and does it matter to the people in the fan community who are addicted to the BRAND? Nah ...
Finally, Pandora looks truly spectacular ... but making that one year deadline? ... How long has RoL been scheduled to open. Yeah, you may be looking at similar delays.
Oh wow, I gave more info than intended ... and why can't I get the Jackson 5's 'I Want You Back' out of my head these days? Guess I know how Michael Colglazier feels.
Hope to be with y'all as time permits shortly.
May not be convincing for you, but I think the info he posts is generally considered reliable, and I've discovered that to be the case when I've done my own research using openly available information.LOL. A quote from an "anonymous" poster, someone who freely admits to having a personal agenda and axe to grind against Iger isn't exactly convincing, either.
May not be convincing for you, but I think the info he posts is generally considered reliable, and I've discovered that to be the case when I've done my own research using openly available information.
Can you do that this time?
The reason I am asking about this is because someone posted what proved to be fanboy assumption regarding regularly schedule reshoots that were happening for the film. Because some folks don't understand the ways a modern "blockbuster" film are done, they erroneously speculated that "OMG SOMETHING IS WRONG!" which wasn't twisted into "Obviously Iger hated it and demanded they reshoot!" by those that like to blame everything directly on him. Even though in this case there was no "blame" to be had in the first place - the additional shooting had been scheduled long before any partial screening, the actors had it in their original schedules from the get go. Standard operating procedure.
Can you do that this time?
The reason I am asking about this is because someone posted what proved to be fanboy assumption regarding regularly schedule reshoots that were happening for the film. Because some folks don't understand the ways a modern "blockbuster" film are done, they erroneously speculated that "OMG SOMETHING IS WRONG!" which wasn't twisted into "Obviously Iger hated it and demanded they reshoot!" by those that like to blame everything directly on him. Even though in this case there was no "blame" to be had in the first place - the additional shooting had been scheduled long before any partial screening, the actors had it in their original schedules from the get go. Standard operating procedure.
What kind of "ideas" was it? you only complained about "perceptions" and "myths".
You're completely ignoring that the business model of Disney's theme parks was changed in the 1990s.I'm back!
Not that anyone remembers this conversation anymore (something to do with Disney's current management somehow being less concerned with guest satisfaction than previous management) but I felt the need to say that people need to realize that in the last 30 years, the corporate culture hasn't changed NEARLY as much as the mechanisms to report to the average layperson about the attitude of the corporate culture.
Disney's current management, whatever you think of them, is subject to WAY more shareholder and public scrutiny than the guys who ran things in the '70s.
ie, in the '50s-'60s,, Walt Disney himself did an amazing job of using his company's various media platforms to extol the virtues of himself as a leader and visionary, intentionally creating a corporate cult of personality around himself that persist to this day. It was brilliant, but let us not conflate this brilliance with a genuine altruism for guest satisfaction.
In the '80s, the Walt Disney Company still did a commendable job at publicizing their own customer-service training as a kind of corporate propaganda (their keys of customer service mumbo-jumbo was widely distributed to various corporate training outlets), which obliquely served the dual purpose of communicating the effectiveness of their corporate leadership and their supposed dedication to guest satisfaction.
My point is this: never confuse Disney's past effectiveness at making you think that they actually care about your in-park experience with how they have ever, or still do, care about this.
Their goal, like any company's, has been, is, and always will be, to make money.
Anyone who begins to doubt this has my skepticism, "clever" Monsters Incorporated image macro or no.
You're completely ignoring that the business model of Disney's theme parks was changed in the 1990s.
I'm back!
Not that anyone remembers this conversation anymore (something to do with Disney's current management somehow being less concerned with guest satisfaction than previous management) but I felt the need to say that people need to realize that in the last 30 years, the corporate culture hasn't changed NEARLY as much as the mechanisms to report to the average layperson about the attitude of the corporate culture.
Disney's current management, whatever you think of them, is subject to WAY more shareholder and public scrutiny than the guys who ran things in the '70s.
ie, in the '50s-'60s,, Walt Disney himself did an amazing job of using his company's various media platforms to extol the virtues of himself as a leader and visionary, intentionally creating a corporate cult of personality around himself that persist to this day. It was brilliant, but let us not conflate this brilliance with a genuine altruism for guest satisfaction.
In the '80s, the Walt Disney Company still did a commendable job at publicizing their own customer-service training as a kind of corporate propaganda (their keys of customer service mumbo-jumbo was widely distributed to various corporate training outlets), which obliquely served the dual purpose of communicating the effectiveness of their corporate leadership and their supposed dedication to guest satisfaction.
My point is this: never confuse Disney's past effectiveness at making you think that they actually care about your in-park experience with how they have ever, or still do, care about this.
Their goal, like any company's, has been, is, and always will be, to make money.
Anyone who begins to doubt this has my skepticism, "clever" Monsters Incorporated image macro or no.
You're completely ignoring that the business model of Disney's theme parks was changed in the 1990s.
I am.
Business models and the morality belying them are not the same thing.
The only reason Disney didn't charge that they did for their parks in the '70s as they do now is that they didn't know they could get away with it.
If they knew they could have, they would have.
Stepped into a Disney Store yesterday.
They were selling toys for Rogue One.
Toys that weren't meant for 13+.
Doesn't mean the film will end up being bad, but it wouldn't be the first film directed in it's content to sell toys, and we all know how Batman & Robin turned out...
Yes they DID even back in the 50's Walt was complaining about 'The Sharp Pencil Boys' who wanted him to cut quality and maintenance to 'improve' profit margins.
A common end does not justify any means or make them all equivalent. It's this same dumb idea that a business model is a reflection of some sort of Platonic, deterministic, universal truth. That there is only true business model that everything must and does move towards.I am.
Business models and the morality belying them are not the same thing.
The only reason Disney didn't charge that they did for their parks in the '70s as they do now is that they didn't know they could get away with it.
If they knew they could have, they would have.
Actions speak louder than words. If Iger today said that same statement I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. Walt's actions during the first 11 years of Disneyland's operation while he was alive make that statement from him very believable.Did you ever stop and think that maybe you know this anecdote because they wanted you to know this anecdote?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.