A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Phil12]

I've clarified Disney live action remake to the more inclusive Disney live action "BRAND deposit" in the incorrect manner Disney chooses to use that term. "Tomorrowland" is absolutely one of the company's "BRAND deposit" exercises.

Unfortunately, you don't see where I'm coming from and I apologize if I haven't made it clear enough. The issue with these live action BRAND films is that they don't add anything, they strip mine existing Disney works. With the exception of "Rescuers Down Under", all of those films are not based on Disney IP. They all sought to use these existing stories as foundations to tell new interpretations of stories. They were all additive. With these live action projects, all Disney makes are xeroxs of its reinterpretations. Do we want a Disney that just serves up less imaginative versions of we already know instead of offering us something new?

That's not to say these films are bad, Cinderella was very good and I have high hopes for Brad Bird's "Tomorrowland" and Jon Favreau's "Jungle Book", but we need to see that these BRAND deposits films are bad for Disney long term and that there is a distinction between adapting existing work versus mercilessly strip mining the company's IP.

Oh and @BrianLo , I will get to your argument that Disney wouldn't want to make a film like "Star Wars" or "E.T.". Some family needs have had to take precedence over messing around on these MAGICAL parts for me to offer you a thoughtful rebuttal.

But I would argue that Disney has plenty of IP to strip mine. Back in the old days prior to VHS tapes, Disney would rerelease their classic films to theaters on a six or seven year rotating schedule. That was specifically designed so parents would take their little children to see Peter Pan, Snow White (or any of the other classic films) and then to put them back in the "vault". This enabled Disney to spread the IP over multiple generations and make money on the reruns.

When VHS tapes hit the market, Disney was the very last studio to put its content out for purchase by the public. Even then they played the "back in the vault" game by only releasing their classic titles on VHS (and later DVD) for a limited period. They actually demanded that retailers send back unsold Disney VHS tapes once the "back in the vault" date had expired. The entire strategy was designed to make as much money as possible from each release.

However, we all know that those days are gone. The amount of money that can be realized from digital sales is staggering and none of the studios is willing to miss that boat. The idea now is to meet the demand. If people want to spend their money on buying the most recent Marvel or Star Wars junk-fest, Disney is more than happy to take their money.

Back in Walt's day, Davy Crockett was a big deal for s short time. But Disney made a fortune in selling Crockett brand records, coonskin caps and other junk. The lesson Disney learned is that these fads are often unexpected (such as Frozen) and they come quick. The company must be able to spring into action quickly in order to sell all the peripheral paraphernalia they can before the bubble bursts.

The object for Disney is just to keep cranking out these movies in the hope that a few will resonate with the populace so they can sell stuff and more stuff. The films are designed to sell the brand for the sake of making lots of money. They are very good at selling the brand. Selling stuff is a good thing.

 

[andysol]

Eww take out Star Wars, Marvel and Dreamworks films and that is just depressing.

But it's not "Disney". They are Disney Owned or Distributed. Really hard to get warm and fuzzy and all emotionally attached to "Distributed by Disney!!!!!!! Yeah!!!! Disney Worldwide Distribution!!!!!!

Just kinda rings hollow.

But it will make them a boat load of money.

I liked Disney more when they made less money.

The obnoxious whining just gets more and more obnoxious.

Disney has been in the middle of its second renaissance for the last 6-7 years with absolutely incredible films- both commercially and critically. Princess and the Frog, Tangled, Winnie the Pooh, Wreck it Ralph, Frozen, Big Hero 6.
So Eww? Hollow? How exactly can you two come to that conclusion?

Take Star Wars and Marvel out of the past 6-7 years- are we unhappy with Disney's releases? No? Then stop the nonsense.

 

[SirLink]

That would be like saying, "Take Big Mac, Quarter Pounder, and French Fries out of the mix and McDonald's Sales are just depressing!" ROFL.

You want real depressing, look at Disney's Live Action slate over the past decade prior to Marvel. Imagine what it would look like now without two of the world's great mega-franchises.

Disney has had very very few "original" properties, ever - live action or animation. Over the next few years, it's pretty likely Disney will end up being the #1 money making studio of the decade. And that wouldn't have happen without the "Ew!" other franchises.

It's really time for folks to get over this, it's becoming rather silly.

I think you missed what I was getting at. The 'Ew' was directed at Disney Studios/WDAS/Pixar stuff, the only decent films on the list will be Marvel/Star Wars/Dreamworks films. The Disney branded films all look and sound terrible...

Think before you jump...

 

[SirLink]

The obnoxious whining just gets more and more obnoxious.

Disney has been in the middle of its second renaissance for the last 6-7 years with absolutely incredible films- both commercially and critically. Princess and the Frog, Tangled, Winnie the Pooh, Wreck it Ralph, Frozen, Big Hero 6.
So Eww? Hollow? How exactly can you two come to that conclusion?

Take Star Wars and Marvel out of the past 6-7 years- are we unhappy with Disney's releases? No? Then stop the nonsense.

Nah Star Wars and Marvel and Dreamworks distributed films like 'War Horse' have been the only bright spots in Disney film content. WDAS, Disney Studio and Pixar stuff has been the same old 'guff

 

[wishiwere@wdw]

I believe it's I-Drive it runs next to...

Edit: What maxairmike said.

A few years ago I know there was a B&M hyper in the works. I wonder if this is bringing those plans back to life? Regardless, this is great news. This park needs something major to get over this slump they are in and a decent coaster could just do the trick.

 

[Funmeister]

Sorry to switch gears and sorry again if this has been posted...

I guess the costs are about to go up? Thoughts @WDW1974

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-disney-magic-band-lawsuit-20150423-story.html

 

[andysol]

Nah Star Wars and Marvel and Dreamworks distributed films like 'War Horse' have been the only bright spots in Disney film content. WDAS, Disney Studio and Pixar stuff has been the same old 'guff

Oh, so you've seen the new Star Wars, have you?

So wreck it Ralph is on the same plane as Oliver and company and home on the range? So frozen didn't eclipse every Disney movie in history?

Disney Studios? They aren't cranking out Cinderella 3- they're making tinkerbell and planes. While not masterpieces- as far as direct to video- please, tell me who is cranking out better films. Universal with Barbie and monster high?

Pixar and Disney are on some weird dimension where Pixar has gotten less original and worse, while Disney has gotten immensely more original and critically acclaimed

So you can call it "guff" but you are a troll- not a movie critic. One can simple look at box office totals and rotten tomatoes scores to see you are in the minority.



Here is the real rub though- why are you here? If you want to say DHS sucks, I'll agree with you. If you want to say maintenance has been mediocre at WDW- I'll beat that drum with you. But when you intentionally just hate everything and anything they do well- which anyone with half a brain cell would agree that the movie studio section is top notch right now- what's the point of your existence here? You can't enjoy anything. You can't find happiness here. You need a new hobby.

 

[FrankLapidus]

Nah Star Wars and Marvel and Dreamworks distributed films like 'War Horse' have been the only bright spots in Disney film content. WDAS, Disney Studio and Pixar stuff has been the same old 'guff

No they haven't, certainly not WDAS in any event. And both animation studios are releasing original, diverse films in the coming years in Zootopia and Moana (WDAS) and Inside Out and The Good Dinosaur (Pixar). I know you don't like animation and have some strange grudge against John Lasseter but each studio is thriving and if the upcoming films are of a similar quality as the "guff" that they've released in recent years then both WDAS and Pixar will remain pivotal cornerstones of the company.

Animation is in the midst of another renaissance at Disney and with Lasseter at the helm the future continues to look very bright.

 

[Mr. Peabody]

But I would argue that Disney has plenty of IP to strip mine. Back in the old days prior to VHS tapes, Disney would rerelease their classic films to theaters on a six or seven year rotating schedule. That was specifically designed so parents would take their little children to see Peter Pan, Snow White (or any of the other classic films) and then to put them back in the "vault". This enabled Disney to spread the IP over multiple generations and make money on the reruns.

When VHS tapes hit the market, Disney was the very last studio to put its content out for purchase by the public. Even then they played the "back in the vault" game by only releasing their classic titles on VHS (and later DVD) for a limited period. They actually demanded that retailers send back unsold Disney VHS tapes once the "back in the vault" date had expired. The entire strategy was designed to make as much money as possible from each release.

However, we all know that those days are gone. The amount of money that can be realized from digital sales is staggering and none of the studios is willing to miss that boat. The idea now is to meet the demand. If people want to spend their money on buying the most recent Marvel or Star Wars junk-fest, Disney is more than happy to take their money.

Back in Walt's day, Davy Crockett was a big deal for s short time. But Disney made a fortune in selling Crockett brand records, coonskin caps and other junk. The lesson Disney learned is that these fads are often unexpected (such as Frozen) and they come quick. The company must be able to spring into action quickly in order to sell all the peripheral paraphernalia they can before the bubble bursts.

The object for Disney is just to keep cranking out these movies in the hope that a few will resonate with the populace so they can sell stuff and more stuff. The films are designed to sell the brand for the sake of making lots of money. They are very good at selling the brand. Selling stuff is a good thing.

You've basically made the argument that Disney can sell its classic films to new generations. If the object is to sell merchandise, wouldn't Disney be better served by investing in new IP to grow the brand instead of recycling the same stories?

 

[NearTheEars]

Nah Star Wars and Marvel and Dreamworks distributed films like 'War Horse' have been the only bright spots in Disney film content. WDAS, Disney Studio and Pixar stuff has been the same old 'guff

Man it sucks that all that same old gruff has been a hit with audiences and critics. Oh, well.

 

[gmajew]

Sorry to switch gears and sorry again if this has been posted...

I guess the costs are about to go up? Thoughts @WDW1974

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-disney-magic-band-lawsuit-20150423-story.html

This is so common in patent lawsuits. I have a tech company that I own a few patents that I came up with and I have filed suit against several companies. It is part of the ugly process of getting paid. What ends up happening is the company that infringed will need to lay a royalty to the other company. It is min usually in the big picture.

 

[stevehousse]

I think their film schedule looks great! No matter what you think Or feel, those ARE now considered Disney films! Their line up will make them billions! ( which unfortunately will not go toward new park attractions any sooner than we all know they should)

 

[Phil12]

You've basically made the argument that Disney can sell its classic films to new generations. If the object is to sell merchandise, wouldn't Disney be better served by investing in new IP to grow the brand instead of recycling the same stories?

They've done both. Olaf is everywhere at Wal-Mart and tons of Pixar merchandise, Cinderella, Star Wars, Marvel, Pirates of the Caribbean and still lots of old school Mickey, Minnie and Goofy. They don't need a lot of new IP when they can so easily recycle the old stuff. Bob Iger knows that content is everything at Disney so he acquires everything he can. I even saw Stich Elvis today on a coffee mug. For those that don't like the Disney branding this will help their boo boo.

 

[Cesar R M]

Sorry to switch gears and sorry again if this has been posted...

I guess the costs are about to go up? Thoughts @WDW1974

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-disney-magic-band-lawsuit-20150423-story.html

The actually wonder if this "Icom" Company is actually one of these patent trolls that love to sue everyone in California. (hint hint Apple)

 

[GoofGoof]

You've basically made the argument that Disney can sell its classic films to new generations. If the object is to sell merchandise, wouldn't Disney be better served by investing in new IP to grow the brand instead of recycling the same stories?

Isn't this true for every movie studio? It's not just Disney. Look at the slate of movies coming out this year and which ones are predicted to be big. The vast majority are sequels. Excluding DIS movies:

• Jurassic World
• Hunger Games Part 4
• Furious 7
• Minions
• James Bond
• Ted 2
• The Divergent Series Part 2
• Mission Impossible
• Pan (not a sequel, but not an original story either)
• Taken 3
• Fantastic Four
• Mad Max
• Pitch Perfect 2
• Paul Blart Mall Cop 2 (I couldn't make this stuff up)

It's not just Disney rolling out the sequels and remakes. Not that it makes it right, but that's apparently what sells these days. They are giving the people what they want.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

The Star Wars films will be hits.

Does anyone think that Star Wars movies are "Disney" movies?

What about Avengers? Guardians of the Galaxy?

 

[spacemt354]

Isn't this true for every movie studio? It's not just Disney. Look at the slate of movies coming out this year and which ones are predicted to be big. The vast majority are sequels. Excluding DIS movies:

• Jurassic World
• Hunger Games Part 4
• Furious 7
• Minions
• James Bond
• Ted 2
• The Divergent Series Part 2
• Mission Impossible
• Pan (not a sequel, but not an original story either)
• Taken 3
• Fantastic Four
• Mad Max
• Pitch Perfect 2
• Paul Blart Mall Cop 2 (I couldn't make this stuff up)

It's not just Disney rolling out the sequels and remakes. Not that it makes it right, but that's apparently what sells these days. They are giving the people what they want.

And that's just 2015. Here's some in 2016...

Kung Fu Panda 3
The Nut Job 2
Ride Along 2
Zoolander 2
Beverly Hills Cop
Batman v Superman
The Divergent Series 3
Snow White and the Huntsman 2
X-Men: Apocalypse
Neighbors 2
Independence Day 2
Now You See Me 2
The Conjuring 2
Ice Age 5

I have to say, half of these are just ridiculous...but it's a sequel driven world these days.

 

[spacemt354]

The Star Wars films will be hits.

Does anyone think that Star Wars movies are "Disney" movies?

What about Avengers? Guardians of the Galaxy?

The new Star Wars, yes I consider those more Disney movies. Walt Disney Pictures is part of the production team in addition to distributing the film.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is 99% Marvel Studios. 1% Bob Iger announcing the success of the films to stockholders.

 

[GoofGoof]

And that's just 2015. Here's some in 2016...

Kung Fu Panda 3
The Nut Job 2
Ride Along 2
Zoolander 2
Beverly Hills Cop
Batman v Superman
The Divergent Series 3
Snow White and the Huntsman 2
X-Men: Apocalypse
Neighbors 2
Independence Day 2
Now You See Me 2
The Conjuring 2
Ice Age 5

I have to say, half of these are just ridiculous...but it's a sequel driven world these days.

I think the ridiculous train left the station with A sequel to Paul Blart

The Star Wars films will be hits.

Does anyone think that Star Wars movies are "Disney" movies?

What about Avengers? Guardians of the Galaxy?

I'm guessing major Disney shareholders and any execs with stock options do.

 

[Progress.City]

Has the Star Wars spin off movie Rogue One been discussed here? If not, I was just reading about it. It was announced that it will take place before A New Hope and is about how the Rebels stole the Death Star plans.