A Spirited Dirty Dozen ...

[Cesar R M]

Gee, where did all those photos of my kids with Mickey come from then?

Figment of your imagination caused by pixie dust overdosing

 

[BubbaQuest]

I heard, and am not at all surprised, that Andy Castro is leaving Micechat. I think that's a shame for fans who wanted a weekly unvarnished look at the good, the bad and the ugly in Anaheim...

This is so sad. MiceAge was the first site I found, years ago, that offered more than simple trip planning or pixie-dusted reposting of Disney Press Releases. It treated me like an adult, shared its love of theme parks and was also willing to speak its own truth.

 

[No Name]

Bad example? Ironic example? I can't decide.

It's a great example. Oh please, don't bring up Hollwood Studios today. That may make it an ironic example, but certainly not a bad one in any way. Then and now have almost nothing to do with each other.

It is the most classic example of Disney beating out the competition. Universal had been slowly planning their Florida park for multiple years. Then Eisner came in in 1985 and said "hey, we can't lose ground like this" and had MGM studios built. It took only 4 years for Disney to go from idea to reality, and they opened their park a year before Universal, a huge move. Universal started whining that Disney copied their ideas, and Eisner was like "Copied? Umm actually, you copied us, cause we opened first!" Universal didn't get much attention and stayed the far inferior (or at least perceived as inferior) resort until 20 years later.

When people say "Disney is a business," they are absolutely correct. Disney is a business. So maybe the company should act like they did in the 80s and actually care to dominate over the competition.

 

[FigmentJedi]

I have hope for Del Toro. He doesnt slowdown on trying his best to bring new stuff. Like Pacific Rim and El Laberinto del Fauno..
Cant wait for him to do the last Hellboy before Ron Pearlman and Doug Jones are too old to get the prosthetics.

At this point, Hellboy 3 apparently hinges on Pacific Rim 2 being successful.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Perhaps it's just a cultural difference, but if Eisner in 1990, when Universal Orlando was opening, had said "Florida already has Disney -- they really ought not have come to Florida at all" he would've been laughed at. He would've been called a fool. And for good reason, because it's a foolish comment. Instead, Eisner beat Universal to the punch and opened Hollywood Studios. He showed them who's boss.

My memory is a bit foggy but I'm pretty sure I remember Eisner talking down Universal opening a park in Orlando.

Opening day at Disney-MGM Studios was a disaster; there was a huge line of 'Guests' at Guest Relations demanding their money back after riding the park's few rides and finishing by late morning.

Some think DHS is a half-day park today. In May 1989, I believe it opened with only 2 attractions!

People were not happy at all with the park until the Indiana Jones Stunt Spectacular and Star Tours opened later in the year.

Universal Studios opened a year later but with a fuller list of attractions.

I get where you are coming from with Wang Jianlin's comments on SDL but don't think the opening of Disney-MGM Studios is a good comparison.

 

[Figments Friend]

I'd like to think Bruce Vaughn got fired because he was an incompetent leader without a single creative cell in his body.

I like to view it as an act of karma after his mistreatment of Mr. Baxter.


-

 

[NearTheEars]

I commented on the artistic and production choices.. and people came back with 'its required for this film'. That's not a matter of appeal, that is a matter of people arguing the choice was the only one available.

Mine was really more a comment on the production... It looks like a video game.

I gathered that you would prefer all real sets. So it sounds like a film enhanced with CGI wouldn't appeal to you. And like I said. That's perfectly fine. If anyone thinks it's impossible to create sets without CGI ... well, I hope they know that's obviously not true.

Regardless of how they got to the end product, I'm still excited for the film.

Edit: I see you've moved on. And I shall as well.

 

[Absimilliard]

My memory is a bit foggy but I'm pretty sure I remember Eisner talking down Universal opening a park in Orlando.

Opening day at Disney-MGM Studios was a disaster; there was a huge line of 'Guests' at Guest Relations demanding their money back after riding the park's few rides and finishing by late morning.

Some think DHS is a half-day park today. In May 1989, I believe it opened with only 2 attractions!

People were not happy at all with the park until the Indiana Jones Stunt Spectacular and Star Tours opened later in the year.

Universal Studios opened a year later but with a fuller list of attractions.

I get where you are coming from with Wang Jianlin's comments on SDL but don't think the opening of Disney-MGM Studios is a good comparison.

I visited the Disney MGM Studios as a child in July 1989 and it was still as bad as you said. The park opened with two physical rides: The Backstage Tour which was over 30 minutes for the tram part and the Great Movie Ride. Indiana Jones Stunt was in soft openings and was missing half the scenes, giving a very odd show. The Theater of the Stars was where the access to Sunset Boulevard is today and was miserable for one reason: it appeared to have been thrown in at the last second and guests had to sit in the sun with no shade for the length of the performance.

It was a completely half baked idea that was obviously rushed and listening to Bob Gurr talk about his part in it (Catastrophe Canyon), it was obvious they were not in a "spare no expense mode" like for Epcot.

 

[TalkingHead]

I visited the Disney MGM Studios as a child in July 1989 and it was still as bad as you said. The park opened with two physical rides: The Backstage Tour which was over 30 minutes for the tram part and the Great Movie Ride. Indiana Jones Stunt was in soft openings and was missing half the scenes, giving a very odd show. The Theater of the Stars was where the access to Sunset Boulevard is today and was miserable for one reason: it appeared to have been thrown in at the last second and guests had to sit in the sun with no shade for the length of the performance.

It was a completely half baked idea that was obviously rushed and listening to Bob Gurr talk about his part in it (Catastrophe Canyon), it was obvious they were not in a "spare no expense mode" like for Epcot.

I was there the same month as you, and one of my memories of that visit -- other than the incredible crowds and the sense that there wasn't much to do -- was a fight I saw between two guests in a crowd watching some live entertainment on stage (seems like it was a Muppet stage show, but I could be wrong).

Either way, the park was stigmatized as being "incomplete," a "half-day park," etc. Unreal that there's almost as little there now as there was in 1989.

 

[RSoxNo1]

He shouldn't be a favorite anywhere. I think his biggest fan is in Japan right now (hopefully having a MAGICal trip!)
I get why people listen to him. Like any good con man he is great at spinning yarns and drawing you in. But that's all he does ... he takes something small that may well be true ... and then he BS's his way through the other 80 or 90%.

You're not wrong about Jim's tendency to overstate a project or where it may be on the development path. Having said that, I also defend you where applicable, and neither of you ask me to do it. I'll also be critical of both of you where applicable as well.

I'm sure your response to this will be to not talk about Jim in your threads, but like it or not, he's going to keep coming up in conversation, occasionally by you. But if you keep putting in what are intended to be digs at me and the fact that I have defended Jim, you're going to keep getting responses from me.

The problem that you and Jim both have is that neither of you can help yourself. You love taking digs at him, and he loves sticking his head out there opening himself up to criticism. If you don't want his name mentioned in your threads (which you've requested in the past) you need to practice what you preach. Don't respond when his name is mentioned.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I don't know a single attraction in any theme park in any place that -- alone -- is worth traveling for.

TDS, and indeed the entire TDR, is worth visiting for the entire package. From unique attractions and seasonal entertainment to amazing show quality to great CMs to well ... just about everything except merchandise (which is now all Duffy and cutesy crap) all of that is why you go to Tokyo. You go not just for Hunny Hunt, but because every attraction surrounding it (even 1983-era dark rides) look like they just opened yesterday.

I can't imagine visiting any park for one thing. Nothing is THAT good. ... But I'd like to live in TDS!

The merchandise is an issue. The selection is all character based. I have see one 2 food section of attraction merchandise for Storm Rider (which just closed). I fear that characters will eventually take over Disney Sea because of the culture's infatuation with everything cute.

I was also a little disappointed to see the Mediterranean Harbor side of Mira Costa includes painted detail. It's still a huge step above Portofino, but it's one of the few cut corners in a park that has such a ridiculous attention to detail.

 

[Sped2424]

I am now wading thru posts about how certain members pay their employees ... UGH!!!!
Why can't we focus on Disney, UNI and themed entertainment? This stuff may well be interesting to some ... but it doesn't belong here.

Speaking of Uni they finally admitted to buying 130 million worth of land near idrive. How far off are we from a third gate here

 

[Nmoody1]

Ummm yeah, I'm kind of still chuckling. The fact that he's the richest (article says second-richest) man in China makes it all the more embarassing. He can criticize it all he wants. He's from the competition, so of course that's what he's gonna do. But when he makes such embarrasing and dumb comments, it means nothing to me. It doesn't take SDL down, it only lifts it up a notch.

I'd like to see more quotes of exactly what he rather than just a description/summary.

Perhaps it's just a cultural difference, but if Eisner in 1990, when Universal Orlando was opening, had said "Florida already has Disney -- they really ought not have come to Florida at all" he would've been laughed at. He would've been called a fool. And for good reason, because it's a foolish comment. Instead, Eisner beat Universal to the punch and opened Hollywood Studios. He showed them who's boss.

When Mr. Wang shows Disney who's boss, then I'll stop chuckling.

I think you need to think more like a Chinese person! It's a different mindset, certainly different to yours!

 

[HMF]

It's all about a group of aviation enthusiasts who "developed a sort of flying theater -- a hang-gliding simulator that brings the exhilarating experience of flying to all visitors."
.

Ouch, they really feel the need to explain every single detail with a contrived backstory?

 

[zooey]

OK, so what?

I see Disney fanbois crowing about this often like it is tied to their self worth. I don't get it.

Disney has a well-oiled machine right now with each Studio producing huge successful tentpoles. To the point that even if 1-2 bomb completely every year, it won't make a difference.

The question really is how much is too much? When will fans decide they really don't want another Marvel film that was just like the 16 before? When will they think they've seen enough real life (if real life were CGI) redos of animated classics? When will putting a 2 ...3 ... 4 ... 5 ... 6 at the end of a film be too much?

I don't see that for the next 3-4 years ... but again, so what? I care about being entertained when I see a new film. The box office results don't effect me one way or the other.

You can talk about it in two ways. You can't deny that they're financially successful movies. They just are. Internationally and domestically. So, they're doing something right. It's not fanboys propping these things up like Orange Bird merch... These films are embraced by global audiences.
That doesn't speak to the quality of the films, but generally I'd say they're good enough. Sometimes very good. I liked Civil War a lot. Jungle Book was fantastic. They earned their right to exist, despite both being recycled in some way.
Movies are low risk for me. 10 bucks. 2 hours. That's it. They haven't done anything with such poor quality that it made me angry or feel like I wasted my time for a long time. Alice 2 looks that way though. Won't be seeing that one...
And you could really say "so what" about pretty much anything. It's not tied to self worth that's ridiculous. But you don't also have to point at obviously successful things and say so what so what. If you don't like them that's fine, or if you think it's a sinking ship that's fine. But people liking the studio output is also fine.

 

[Quinnmac000]

It's a great example. Oh please, don't bring up hollwood studios today. That may make it an ironic example, but certainly not a bad one in any way. Then and now have almost nothing to do with each other.

It is the most classic example of Disney beating out the competition. Universal had been slowly planning their Florida park for multiple years. Then Eisner came in in 1985 and said "hey, we can't lose ground like this" and had MGM studios built. It took only 4 years for Disney to go from idea to reality, and they opened their park a year before Universal, a huge move. Universal started whining that Disney copied their ideas, and Eisner was like "Copied? Umm actually, you copied us, cause we opened first!" Universal didn't get much attention and stayed the far inferior (or at least perceived as inferior) resort until 20 years later.

When people say "Disney is a business," they are absolutely correct. Disney is a business. So maybe the company should act like they did in the 80s and actually care to dominate over the competition.

Difference is Wanda can screw over Disney in the US if they wanted. You don't off the guys who own what's about to become the world's largest movie chain (AMC and Carmike plus their theatres in China). Nothing states they have to show Disney movies at their theatres.

Wanda isn't a company I would mess with.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Difference is Wanda can screw over Disney in the US if they wanted. You don't **** off the guys who own what's about to become the world's largest movie chain (AMC and Carmike plus their theatres in China). Nothing states they have to show Disney movies at their theatres.

Wanda isn't a company I would mess with.

On the inverse Disney is able to bully theaters because they're making the movies people are going to see in droves. People don't just go to the AMC to eat not to mention that they have two high performing theaters on Disney property.

 

[FigmentJedi]

New Finding Dory trailer is up

 

[elchippo]

It could even be based on the notion that they are in fact married in reality, and only play a dating couple onscreen, as per Walt Disney's say-so.

Let's hope they don't ever pull the same mistake as they did with the Muppets and break them up like Kermit and Piggy.

 

[RobbinsDad]

Clears throat and steps on soap box.....

My parents expected us to work and "earn our keep" so to speak. Everyone had chores, a paper route, a babysitting gig, something. We were not poor, but they had been and knew that instilling these values in us would benefit us to create a life that was better than theirs. It worked. We were rewarded for good grades and accomplishments. We took exactly one out of state vacation to visit relatives. I had two "generations" of children. My two daughters who might be considered the children of boomers like me (GenX?) and my second two, a girl and a boy that were born in 1988 and 1989 who came along later (GenY?)

Fast forward with the two youngest, I tried as best I could to emulate my parents values with my children. The attitude that the next generation should have it better than the last resulted in a culture of coddling and was well represented everywhere I looked. My son received participation trophies. The schools sent home literature about self esteem initiatives. Try as I might to have a "normal" birthday party for my 6 year old, after she attended parties where private venues were rented and catering was the norm. I had a normal party. I baked the cake, decorated my humble abode, did face painting on all the party guests with a kit I bought, played some games and had prizes for the winners etc. The kids loved it! The parents, not so much. Their attitude was "When we hosted your child, we rented out the poolside room at the local indoor pool, had pizza delivered from their favorite restaurant, and gave everyone a prize.

As my income increased, I caved and started the "keep up with the Joneses" routine. I remember once mentioning to my then husband, "what do I have to do for the next birthday party, rent an elephant?". All of their friends had cell phones. I told them they would have to wait until their teens. They pouted and complained to their friends that I was old fashioned and didn't understand. I stood my ground but when the elder of the two turned 13, I got them each a phone because they are 18 months apart and I knew talking to eachother was necessary.

One thing I would NOT do, is treat them like mere children. They were "adults in the making". They were not protected from the news, the real world or the realities of finances. They were brought in to family budget decisions anXd knew the limitations of said budget.

The schools, the parents, the peer pressure is all very real. Short of home-schooling and living off the grid, it is a jungle out there. Fortunately, my kids have had the "Thrill of Victory and the Agony of Defeat" in various endeavors of their life which helped them greatly. Over protection, over-parenting, over-protecting, over-expecting, over-promising etc. isn't working to create responsible, caring, considerate, humane, or even realistic adults. Yes, my children are now adults. With real adult problems. And they can deal with them.

It was hard to raise Gen-Yers. I cannot imagine now that my oldest daughters have children ( GenXers, they were raised by a hard working single mom) I cannot imagine the pressure they are under to be helicopter parents or over-protective or raise PLSF (precious little snowflakes). Oddly, my grandchildren were raised by great mom's who taught them to appreciate everything and everybody. They are polite. They are funny. They have great vocabularies. They have daily chores. They do their homework before they watch TV or use their electronics. They have select one extracurricular activity to focus on etc.

I do not think we are "doomed". I worry more about the generation that follows the "Millenials". However, the entitlement mentality has taken over everywhere. When everyone is so easily "offended" and "being offended" is now taking on an equivalent footing as an assult, that is disturbing.

Drops Mike. Steps off soapbox.

A lot of what you say is true, but the next generation is not necessarily doomed. Remember, Gen Z (or whatever title those born after 2000 ends up with) is the first generation to be raised since Baby Boom (and even moreso Traditionalists) in an environment where war and economic instability are an everyday part of life. Experts have suggested that this generation may have two very important things in common with these older generations as a result - greater fiscal responsibility and a sense of obligation to the community. This would be a refreshing change after Generation Me.