A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Mr. Peabody]

What I like is that they really pushed the strengths of 2D as if to say if this is how we're going out, we're going to prove why CG is not a suitable replacement - there's just no way, even now a few years on, that 3D characters could ever do half the things the animators do in Pooh. If you were to take a few freeze frames from that, and compare them to, say, Frozen, the CGI ones would look so still and lifeless in comparison.

The hand of each individual artist on Pooh really shines through when you compare the animation of the different characters. Never to the point of distraction, but enough that each performance feels special. Even if it's a throwback to the '60s, I still appreciate the "book illustration" visual style; it feels warm and organic. These are things that hand-drawn animation does very well.

CGI animators recognize the value of hand drawing in their own field, and some are even seeking to combine the strengths of the two forms with projects like Paperman. Really, both media have their strengths. For every potential Finding Nemo that looks great in CGI, there is a potential Winnie the Pooh waiting in the wings to dazzle with hand-drawn. Disney should support both in the interests of giving artists the flexibility to choose the medium that works best for their story.

 

[WDW1974]

Spirited Good Friday (aren't they all supposed to be?) Musings:

Some Spirited Reading: http://ajw.asahi.com/article/business/AJ201504020057

It does speak for itself ...

Oh, I also hear that two-hour-plus waits for the new Jungle Cruise at TDL are the norm unless you get there at opening. Has @WDWFigment experienced this yet? (can't recall)

So, Spring Break is headed toward the finish with Easter Sunday coming up (no, I won't talk about how special the WDW Easter Parade used to be and how it was just another victim of putting money before show because y'all know that, even those folks here who just live to defend the company) and where are all the breathless phased closing threads? ... Hmm ... crickets, I hear.

It does seem to reflect the same time last year when mid-March was busy (but not crazy busy) and then ... crowds fell off over a cliff. I was up there the week after Easter if memory serves me and it was not even moderately crowded.

I do appreciate all the fun tangents y'all are prone to go on here ... but Marvel?!?! Yes, I admit that their product (beyond the funtatstic GotG) does very little for me.

One quick question, since every time I bring this subject out I'm told that everyone here was a big Marvel fan a decade ago, how much Marvel talk existed on this forum prior to 12/09? Any at all? Oh, of course, the Disney fanbois likely bashing the 'overrated' Spidey attraction at IOA and ripping all of the exposed coaster track on the Incredible Hulk. Beyond that? Yeah ... crickets again. Because most of you weren't Marvel fans until it became hip to be (hell, you'll even rip the original Spidey trilogy because it fits the current Disney/Marvel narrative).

I bet you could have counted the actual positive posts on Marvel on one foot with toes to spare before Iger the Acquirer bought the company.

Hey, I've enjoyed some of the films (and loved one mentioned above), but this whole notion of a Cinematic Universe where you must see 21 films to appreciate the entire story is just not my idea of fun. It is Disney-like, though, as in it seeks out the OCD fanbois who will see everything (the same ones who bought the A-Z pins that were exactly the same ... or had to have the LE tees for every original EPCOT pavilions ... or are desperately trying to buy every special mug from the Grog Grotto on eBay) no matter what.

Oh, hey, what's this? Email from Disney AP HQ ... I can book the A$$ this summer for the low-low rate of $107 a night plus tax. Amazing. A decade ago I was paying roughly that to stay at WL and DAK Lodge. Now, please tell me how Disney's business model isn't going to come crashing down on the next CEO.

To the folks getting all excited because Disney installed two tiny fountains in the new Hub, that apparently haven't ceased working yet, I'd remind y'all of the roughly dozen (maybe more ... likely more) in Adventureland that were shut down about 15 years ago to save on money and maintenance (HINT: if it has the word 'Fuente' in it, that's a fountain, not a garbage and potted plant holder).

 

[WDW1974]

So, first Alice ... then Maleficent ... now Cinderella ... with Dumbo and Mulan and Jungle Book and POOH?!?!? to come.

Nope, no resting on laurels here.

No, producing cutting edge entertainment by telling new stories.

 

[ford91exploder]

Not quite 50-150K. And wasn't there a press release that said these had their propulsion upgraded and modernized? That would drive the price down a bit for collectors.

It's quite possible to do a reversible upgrade, I have a 68 Mopar - and I've replaced its points and condenser ignition with a Pertronix in the distributor and the rest of the ignition with a MSD system is it modernized and upgraded yep - can it be returned to stock for the purist - yep.

There is a also a Holley Pro-Jection system in place of the carb, Upgrade yep, reversible to the factory carb Yep.

So it's quite possible to upgrade a classic car without making permanent alterations which reduce it's value yet give you modern performance and reliability.

 

[WDW1974]

Spirited Lifestyler Shot:

Hey, @wdwmagic, do we know whether Disney is providing bloggers/podcasters/Lifestylers (most who live in Central Florida) with free stays at the Poly DVC for its upcoming 'media' event?

 

[WDW1974]

Ironic..

Ironic ... that in 400-plus pages this is your first comment?

Ironic ... that folks like you are attracted to me like a fanboi to an Imagineer or a Lifestyler to a free movie screening or like a moth to a flame?

That kind of ironic?

 

[Mr. Peabody]

So, first Alice ... then Maleficent ... now Cinderella ... with Dumbo and Mulan and Jungle Book and POOH?!?!? to come.

Nope, no resting on laurels here.

No, producing cutting edge entertainment by telling new stories.

I read that they will be reusing "The Bare Necessities" for the Jungle Book remake. That would make it the third film to use that song. If that's not resting on laurels, then I don't know what is. That is especially lazy, even by their current standards.

 

[WDW1974]

I've used the comparison before and I'll use it again. Disney is the fat person that will do anything to lose weight, except diet and exercise. They will do anything to raise revenue except build new rides.

As a recovering fat person, not only do I not take exception to this statement of fact, I find it to be the perfect analogy for Disney today (at least in FL.)

Again, WDW has built almost nothing under The Weatherman (timeshares and rebuilding and rebranding a shopping mall don't count). Very little substance at all.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

So, first Alice ... then Maleficent ... now Cinderella ... with Dumbo and Mulan and Jungle Book and POOH?!?!? to come.

Nope, no resting on laurels here.

No, producing cutting edge entertainment by telling new stories.

These stories had all been told before, that is why Disney picked them up in the first place. TWDS has been retelling known stories in a different format since 1937, it is exactly what that studio does.

 

[Nubs70]

Spirited Good Friday (aren't they all supposed to be?) Musings:

Some Spirited Reading: http://ajw.asahi.com/article/business/AJ201504020057

It does speak for itself ...

Oh, I also hear that two-hour-plus waits for the new Jungle Cruise at TDL are the norm unless you get there at opening. Has @WDWFigment experienced this yet? (can't recall)

So, Spring Break is headed toward the finish with Easter Sunday coming up (no, I won't talk about how special the WDW Easter Parade used to be and how it was just another victim of putting money before show because y'all know that, even those folks here who just live to defend the company) and where are all the breathless phased closing threads? ... Hmm ... crickets, I hear.

It does seem to reflect the same time last year when mid-March was busy (but not crazy busy) and then ... crowds fell off over a cliff. I was up there the week after Easter if memory serves me and it was not even moderately crowded.

I do appreciate all the fun tangents y'all are prone to go on here ... but Marvel?!?! Yes, I admit that their product (beyond the funtatstic GotG) does very little for me.

One quick question, since every time I bring this subject out I'm told that everyone here was a big Marvel fan a decade ago, how much Marvel talk existed on this forum prior to 12/09? Any at all? Oh, of course, the Disney fanbois likely bashing the 'overrated' Spidey attraction at IOA and ripping all of the exposed coaster track on the Incredible Hulk. Beyond that? Yeah ... crickets again. Because most of you weren't Marvel fans until it became hip to be (hell, you'll even rip the original Spidey trilogy because it fits the current Disney/Marvel narrative).

I bet you could have counted the actual positive posts on Marvel on one foot with toes to spare before Iger the Acquirer bought the company.

Hey, I've enjoyed some of the films (and loved one mentioned above), but this whole notion of a Cinematic Universe where you must see 21 films to appreciate the entire story is just not my idea of fun. It is Disney-like, though, as in it seeks out the OCD fanbois who will see everything (the same ones who bought the A-Z pins that were exactly the same ... or had to have the LE tees for every original EPCOT pavilions ... or are desperately trying to buy every special mug from the Grog Grotto on eBay) no matter what.

Oh, hey, what's this? Email from Disney AP HQ ... I can book the A$$ this summer for the low-low rate of $107 a night plus tax. Amazing. A decade ago I was paying roughly that to stay at WL and DAK Lodge. Now, please tell me how Disney's business model isn't going to come crashing down on the next CEO.

To the folks getting all excited because Disney installed two tiny fountains in the new Hub, that apparently haven't ceased working yet, I'd remind y'all of the roughly dozen (maybe more ... likely more) in Adventureland that were shut down about 15 years ago to save on money and maintenance (HINT: if it has the word 'Fuente' in it, that's a fountain, not a garbage and potted plant holder).

So a projection show nets a 0.3% attendance increase and actual new physical attractions nets a 20% attendance increase.

A forward thinking business person would take the 20%.

A short term accountant would go for the 0.3% increase a it was accomplished with a low capital projection.

From a guest perspective, what's more enjoyable? A projection show or Harry Potter Land?.

Anyone see the disconnect here?

 

[WDW1974]

I'm not trying to defend the fake grass by the way, hate it for aesthetic reasons, but the train of thought that it's going to harm people is a little over-the-top sensationalist.

I'd agree that there has been a lot of hyperbole over that aspect.

But still, who the he ll goes to a theme park to roll around on the ground? It's just yet another example with how out of touch many at Imagineering (as well as theme park Ops are).

I can guarandamntee you this: no way in he ll you'll see George and prissy Andy sitting on the filthy ground/fake grass. Won't happen unless Chapie makes them!

BTW, where were all the breathless posts about George and Andy stopping by the Grog Grotto for drinks that went on their company DREAMS, WISHES, MAGIC Chase Disney Visa? (they did stop by this week!)

 

[doctornick]

One quick question, since every time I bring this subject out I'm told that everyone here was a big Marvel fan a decade ago, how much Marvel talk existed on this forum prior to 12/09? Any at all?

Why would people be talking about Marvel on a Disney site in the past? I don't understand the question. Would you expect there to be a lot of discussion about (say) The Lord of the Rings or Hobbit movies on this site, even though they were popular highly grossing movies?

This is a Disney site and since Disney acquired Marvel, it makes sense to talk about Marvel stuff is a general discussion thread that centers on Disney (not that there isn't already non-Disney related discussions in these threads, but I would think that actual Disney topics would be pretty much "on topic" as much as anything could be).

I bet you could have counted the actual positive posts on Marvel on one foot with toes to spare before Iger the Acquirer bought the company.

Why would there have been? We don't have much discussions about DC comics on these pages because it's not related to Disney. But that doesn't mean people who post here don't like or care about DC comics, only that they would be a weird tangent to bring up. (That said, personally, I love The Flash TV show, to toss my 2 cents in there)

 

[WDW1974]

These stories had all been told before, that is why Disney picked them up in the first place. TWDS has been retelling known stories in a different format since 1937, it is exactly what that studio does.

Not the point, which you know.

It is all about remaking things and creating franchises (topping pigs with pigs is how Old Dead Guy Walt put it!) that go on and on (see MCU and Star Wars as well) versus creating new IP (even if it is based on material that has been around).

 

[WDW1974]

Why would people be talking about Marvel on a Disney site in the past? I don't understand the question. Would you expect there to be a lot of discussion about (say) The Lord of the Rings or Hobbit movies on this site, even though they were popular highly grossing movies?

This is a Disney site and since Disney acquired Marvel, it makes sense to talk about Marvel stuff is a general discussion thread that centers on Disney (not that there isn't already non-Disney related discussions in these threads, but I would think that actual Disney topics would be pretty much "on topic" as much as anything could be).

Why wouldn't they? Indeed, folks here talk about all sorts of film and TV programming they find entertaining. I just don't recall any Marvel posts or long tangents in my first two years here (you know, before TWDC bought them?)

And since we are still a theme park centric site, I might expect the Marvel lovers to talk about the great attractions at IOA (since WDW can never have any of its own). But that isn't what happens ... we get folks talking about the Disney-Sony deal bringing Spidey into the MCU ... or chatter about a Civil War (sounds scary!) ... or people discussing something called Ant Man (is he an exterminator because here in the swamps, I sometimes get ants in the house and could use someone to call!)

Why would there have been? We don't have much discussions about DC comics on these pages because it's not related to Disney. But that doesn't mean people who post here don't like or care about DC comics, only that they would be a weird tangent to bring up. (That said, personally, I love The Flash TV show, to toss my 2 cents in there)

Considering the tangents I have witnessed in my seven years on this site, I don't agree that it would be weird at all.

 

[VJ]

Disney wasn't always just a faceless corporation. To you Disney may be no different to Wal-Mart or McDonalds or Target, but to the kids of the 80s and 90s they couldn't have been more different.

The company under Eisner, following the legacy of Walt, espoused a vision, a way of doing things, and holding oneself to a higher account, and a quality of experience that deeply influenced generations of kids. Engineers, artists, business leaders... many people have ended up doing what they do because of how Disney inspired them... and for those of us for whom that is true, we're all Disney's children.

The strong bond people felt to Disney wasn't to The Walt Disney Company(TM), but to the dreams and ideals of Walt Disney. We were the original pixie-dusters, and while that may seem strange to you, and maybe it is, I'd say we're better people because of it.

I cannot agree more with this quote. I'm more of a Walt guy than a Disney company guy and I don't think I'm alone in that.

 

[Travel Junkie]

Spirited Good Friday (aren't they all supposed to be?) Musings:

Oh, I also hear that two-hour-plus waits for the new Jungle Cruise at TDL are the norm unless you get there at opening. Has @WDWFigment experienced this yet? (can't recall)

In November I waited an hour although earlier in the day it was around 90 minutes. During busier days I would expect it at 2 hours or more. For minimal wait I would either do it first thing or last ride of the night. I would go for last ride of the night as there are much better attractions I would rope drop than JC at TDL and the evening version does have some nice touches. It’s the best JC I have seen (haven’t been at HKDL) but not something I would want to wait 2 hours for, especially with all the other great options in that park.

 

[WDW1974]

Do not forget your wife calling you an A-hole 180 days out because of the difficulty of explaining MM+.

Wait ... Dave has a wife?!?! Has he been hiding here?!?! Is he married to Dr. Blondie?!?!

 

[ford91exploder]

I cannot agree more with this quote. I'm more of a Walt guy than a Disney company guy and I don't think I'm alone in that.

Same here - All the company named for him is doing is damaging his legacy, Change the name to 'The Iger Group' - Brand Management Professionals.

 

[WDW1974]

In November I waited an hour although earlier in the day it was around 90 minutes. During busier days I would expect it at 2 hours or more. For minimal wait I would either do it first thing or last ride of the night. I would go for last ride of the night as there are much better attractions I would rope drop than JC at TDL and the evening version does have some nice touches. It’s the best JC I have seen (haven’t been at HKDL) but not something I would want to wait 2 hours for, especially with all the other great options in that park.

I have heard great things about the redo from folks I trust, but seen mediocre reviews online. I will say the old JC was the attraction I waited the longest in my last visit to TDL for (a whopping 35 minutes!)

The HKDL one is pretty unique because it sorta serves the purpose of the boat traffic on the RoA (well, except at the MK where there's one riverboat that usually operates from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.) You go around Tarzan's Treehouse etc. It has a unique ending that is cool. But it all depends on your skipper (they do three languages, Mandarin, Cantonese and English). And the English ones that I have had have been hit or miss (great delivery or ... ''LOOK ELEPHANTS!!!'')

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Not the point, which you know.

It is all about remaking things and creating franchises (topping pigs with pigs is how Old Dead Guy Walt put it!) that go on and on (see MCU and Star Wars as well) versus creating new IP (even if it is based on material that has been around).

Is it though? I personally could do without the current live-action-fairytale-revisionism, but one could argue that this current onslaught of live-action retellings of known fairytales is the creation of something new just as much as the onslaught of animated retellings of known fairytales was.

Walt would never have bought outside Sci-Fi IP property, say the Star Wars of his time, Jules Verne, and filmed live-action remakes of it, and then milked the IP with rides (never mind nearly two decades later, sigh) and merchandise and home media and tv productions.