Ah, Disney is the 90s........

[tirian]

I understand the arguments about the glory days. But the majority of changes in the parks have been for the better. Philharmagic & Soarin' and a lot of other good attractions were not there in the 90s. Animal Kingdom didn't open until near the end of the 90s. In the good old days they relied more heavily on passive animatronic shows like CBJ, CoP, HoP and MMR that wouldn't interest most guests today.

Attraction changes have been mixed. I'm glad that Epcot finally got more attractions than slow, educational omnimovers; but the new rides should have been ADDITIONS, not replacements. Getting rid of Horizons and Journey Into Imagination were two of the most idiotic things that ever happened at WDW.

DAK was awful when it opened: an overpriced zoo with one good ride (CTX/Dinosaur).

D-MGM (at the time) was actually pretty good because Disney was still using the studio portion. It took them a really long time to figure out what to do with that park after the studios were closed.

The MK was superb. Attractions received regular refurbs, the maintenance was excellent, and it hadn't turned into a rubber-head character free-for-all. With AE and the updated Space Mt., TL 1994 blew Guests' minds when it opened.

All the parks had exclusive merchandise that was WORTH buying.

PI was actually popular back then, too.

Then Eisner correctly realized WDW didn't have enough resorts; but when he turned his attention exclusively to those, the parks suffered and haven't recovered since. It's getting better, though.

 

[tirian]

Thanks for backing me up, nice to know I'm not the only one. Though I must say I'm flabbergasted you lump Hocus Pocus in with the all-time great Disney movies. :shrug:

Who me?!

NO WAY!

I just remember it, that's all! :wave:

 

[AREM]

I will give you that DAK has gotten ALOT better over the years, but the feeling in the parks during the 90s was so exciting. There was electricity in the air everywhere you went in the parks. It was so wonderful. And I do agree about the parks having stuff worth buying back in the 90s. Actually, most anything Disney made back then was worth buying really.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

The MK was superb. Attractions received regular refurbs, the maintenance was excellent, and it hadn't turned into a rubber-head character free-for-all. With AE and the updated Space Mt., TL 1994 blew Guests' minds when it opened.

Yep...It really was the crown jewel of WDW...

All the parks had different "role" back then. Now it's all the same generic stuff.

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

The Lion King did in fact mark the end of era for Disney animation. All Disney animated movies after word

These 2 comments contradict themselves.

What do the movies that followed The Lion King have to do with The Lion King movie itself?

The movies that followed The Lion King marked the decline in Disney animation, not The Lion King itself...

Even at the time of Lion King's Christmas 1994 re-release, Roger Ebert told people to see The Swan Princess instead

It appears that Roger Ebert must have been the only critic that really enjoyed the movie because the movie is labled as being "rotten" with a 38% rating on rottentamatoes.com.

The Disney movies of this decade were apparently subject to intentional poor marketing and sabotage by Eisner that led to their supposed failures.

This statement is not based on fact what-so-ever and has absolutely nothing to do with The Lion King...

Coporate sabotage and deliberate poor marketing/release dates? Are you kidding me?

You explain how one specific film was a hit without referencing the films that came before it which grabbed the Disney Audience

The post that I quoted was specifically talking about The Lion King, so you really shouldn't be surprised that I didn't bother talking about previous Disney films.

And the fact of the matter is that The Lion King was the most successful 2D animated movie Disney has ever had.

anyone who refers to the 1989-1994 period as "The Disney Renaissance"

The reason why people say that is because that was Disney's zenith when it came to both critical and commercial box-office success.

It's so easy to jump on the "Lion King was Amazing"

You're right

It's so easy to jump onto that bandwagon because people saw The Lion King as an amazing movie.

 

[ChrisFL]

As far as attractions:

1982-1995 was the best era since the 1955-1966 era.

1995 seemed to mark the beginning of the end of the top quality things we had come to expect (unless you look at Tokyo)

 

[the-reason14]

Lion King, overated?? Hardly, imo, thats the best disney and probably animated movie of the 90s. I do agree that the 90s was a good time for disney in just about every aspect. I remember watching TLK almost every other day when my little cousin used to come over, and I could almost quote the entire film. And of course, I got tired of it. I didnt really watch the other 90s movies growing up, except TS, which is another 90s great. But recently, Ive seen just about every disney animated movie. And Id have to say that TLK stands out more to me as something better than the others. I dont think the movies after it suck, they may not have done well but I like them. I enjoyed Treasure Planet, and even Atlantis, and while they were not great great, they were still enjoyable.

Anyways, I dont think anyone can say the TLK was the beginning of the end, giving how successful the movie was. Pocohontas was good, and may not have done as well, and while the reputation of disney animation may have pulled in huge numbers for TLK, than why didnt it do that for Pocohantas? But yea, anyways, regardless of what any critic says, I enjoyed the 90s movies. Some werent as great as others, but I would have to say out of all the golden ages of disney animation, the 90s era is my favorate.

 

[Missing20K]

And the fact of the matter is that The Lion King was the most successful 2D animated movie Disney has ever had.

When adjusted for inflation, Snow White had the highest grossing box office totals for any Disney movie. I have no idea about vhs sales.

 

[matt88mph]

So if I had to pick a decade as a "Golden Era," I'd probably single out 1986-95 instead of the '90s as a whole.

Absolutely. Disney had so many outstanding projects during that period that really put themselves on top of the entertainment industry. On the film end, Disney had a renaissance in both the animation and live-action categories. The Little Mermaid proved that Disney was the top dog when it came to animation, and then came more big hits after that: Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King. And even better, Disney was even experimenting with computer animation, starting with Beauty and the Beast. (That work culminated with the partnership with PIXAR and the release of Toy Story. It's hard to believe that we wouldn't have most of the animated films we have today if it wasn't for Toy Story.) In live-action, Disney saw the rise of both Touchtone Pictures and Hollywood Pictures, each of which had fantastic hits during that time. Suddenly, Disney had a chance at Oscars, and not just for music or special achievement.

And, of course, what kind of fan would I be without talking about the theme parks. Before I get to the successes, I will mention that during this period, EuroDisneyland (the original name for Disneyland Paris) opened, which was a flop when it debuted. However, things are starting to pick up for the park.

1986/1987 saw the two most groundbreaking technological debuts in Disneyland/Walt Disney World history: Captain EO and Star Tours. Star Tours brought about the first major use of a motion simulator for a theme park, and allowed Imagineers to use that style of attraction to bring forth worlds that cannot be conveyed in a roller coaster or open-air ride. Captain EO was the first 3-D blockbuster for a theme park that proved that the 3-D medium could be used as more than just a gimmick. In addition, The Living Seas opened in EPCOT Center, which was a revolutionary pavillion where it acted like an actual aquarium with the magic of Disney intertwined.

1988 saw the evolution of Walt Disney World from housing just the theme parks and hotels into a major resort complex with the ongoing construction of Typhoon Lagoon and Pleasure Island.

1989 saw two big developments on both ends of the country: In Anaheim, Splash Mountain opened, which combined the elements of a thrill ride and a dark ride. For anyone who doubts its success, look at the wait time on any given day. In Orlando, the Disney-MGM Studios opened and blew guests away. And this was before Tower of Terror or Rock n' Roller Coaster entered the picture.

1990 saw Star Tours officially open on the East Coast, and Disneyland's 35th Anniversary Celebration. Minor, but noteworthy nonetheless.

1991 saw the debut of Jim Henson's MuppetVision 3D, a consistent crowd pleaser, and poignant due to it being Jim Henson's final piece of work.

1992 saw Splash Mountain open in Walt Disney World, where it still draws immense crowds. Fantasmic debuted in Disneyland as well, which broke new ground in nighttime entertainment.

1993 saw the opening of a brand-new land in Disneyland: Mickey's Toontown, which pushed the creativity of the Imagineers to a brand new level.

1994 saw the redevelopment of Walt Disney World's Tomorrowland, which brought it out of the race to catch up with the rapidly changing view of the future and into a retro, yet timeless, view. In addition, the Tower of Terror opened in the Disney-MGM Studios, which raised the bar in term of Disney thrill rides, and Innoventions opened in Epcot.

1995 saw two big events in theme park history, the opening of the Indiana Jones Adventure in Disneyland and the announcement of Disney's Animal Kingdom, both of which would open the eyes of guests and Imagineers alike to new worlds and new ways of storytelling.

...well, I probably said more than I should have.

 

[ChrisFL]

In Orlando, the Disney-MGM Studios opened and blew guests away.

Really? I mean later in the years it actually had attractions, but to say it blew guests away when it first opened? :shrug:

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

When adjusted for inflation, Snow White had the highest grossing box office totals for any Disney movie. I have no idea about vhs sales.

Snow White's adjusted gross also includes many, many of its re-release ticket sales.

The Lion King is still Disney's most successful 2D animated film as far as actual dollars are concerned.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Thanks for backing me up, nice to know I'm not the only one. Though I must say I'm flabbergasted you lump Hocus Pocus in with the all-time great Disney movies. :shrug:

:lol: Well I love it, I grew up watching it every single Halloween and it's one of my personal favorite regardless of what others say. Newsies 'aint too hot either with the general public but it's fan base is growing at an experiential rate seemingly every year.

 

[Disneykidder]

the 90's were good. Great films--Aladdin, Mermaid, Lion King, Beauty----all top notch and still favorites among kids. The films were great and the scores were awesome, too.

Parks were great, in my opinion. The 25th was going on during that time. I loved the pepto pink cake/castle and thought the decorations, parades and music played were great!

The Disney channel was also thriving. Great new shows and cartoons.:wave:

 

[dixiegirl]

I think regardless of who you are, you'll think that the Disney Channel gets crappier as time goes by. I don't know if it just seems that way, or if it really is...

LMAO!!!!!! Oh so true!!!

 

[Animaniac93-98]

These 2 comments contradict themselves.

What do the movies that followed The Lion King have to do with The Lion King movie itself?

They have to do with the film because they were being compared with The Lion King in the eyes of critics both in terms of box office numbers and their supposed lack of quality.

The movies that followed The Lion King marked the decline in Disney animation, not The Lion King itself...

The Lion King marked the era of continually increasing in gross Disney animated features (once again excluding the Rescuers sequel).

It appears that Roger Ebert must have been the only critic that really enjoyed the movie because the movie is labled as being "rotten" with a 38% rating on rottentamatoes.com.

It was also nominated for a golden globe and recognized by many other critics in the 38%, the online "cirtics" who are also included in deciding a films rating may not have liked it but there were many who did.

This statement is not based on fact what-so-ever and has absolutely nothing to do with The Lion King...

Coporate sabotage and deliberate poor marketing/release dates? Are you kidding me?

No it's not based on fact, just animators and Disney corporate insiders who later let the facts be heard regarding theses films. Of course it has nothing to do with Lion King, but a statement in the last post you made about Disney animators being responsible for the box office failures of their own films (excluding Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear and Emperor's New Groove) but of course you can't be bothered to read your own writing can you?

The post that I quoted was specifically talking about The Lion King, so you really shouldn't be surprised that I didn't bother talking about previous Disney films.

No because it doesn't make sense to talk about Disney films that contributed to the claiming of the audience that would eventually see this film or the formula that it would follow established by it's predecessors or even the influence of Bambi and Hamlet on the story.

And the fact of the matter is that The Lion King was the most successful 2D animated movie Disney has ever had.

Snow White at the time of it's release was the highest grossing motion picture of all time. I think you might want to adjust for inflation before making that claim.

The reason why people say that is because that was Disney's zenith when it came to both critical and commercial box-office success.

Once again, look at Snow White and how that film truly impacted the way we think of movies, or even Pinocchio which also has a higher Rotten tomatoes percentage (since you like using them) and ranking on AFI's top 10 animated movies list.

You're right

It's so easy to jump onto that bandwagon because people saw The Lion King as an amazing movie.

Because they were not around to see the other Disney animated features in their release or able to appreciate the amount of effort that went into something like Sleeping Beauty. It was "amazing" because it was new to them and popular not because it broke new ground with storytelling or how it impacted the face of cinema history (however much you think it might have). It's just ridiculously popular, not something that deserves to be ranked with Disney's best let alone cinema's best.

 

[Missing20K]

Snow White's adjusted gross also includes many, many of its re-release ticket sales.

The Lion King is still Disney's most successful 2D animated film as far as actual dollars are concerned.

I believe the Lion King's adjusted gross also takes into account re-release sales. The Lion King had multiple theatrical releases, as nearly all Disney movies have. Besides, you have to use figures adjusted for inflation. That's the only way you can compare different eras. In fact, the best numbers to use is probably numbers of tickets sold, irrespective of the cost of each individual ticket.

Using your logic Shrek 2 was a better movie than The Lion King or Snow White. I'm not arguing with you on the merits of The Lion King versus Snow White (I really enjoyed The Lion King) just the fact that it seems using adjusted inflation figures, Snow White grossed more. :wave:

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

I believe the Lion King's adjusted gross also takes into account re-release sales.

The Lion King was re-released only once into IMAX theaters back in 2002 and only added around $15 million to its total life-time box-office gross.

Hardly the same comparison with the many, many Snow White re-releases.

as nearly all Disney movies have

Nearly all of the Disney movies re-released post 1990 have not received re-releases.

Besides, you have to use figures adjusted for inflation. That's the only way you can compare different eras.

No you don't have to use adjusted for inflation numbers.

Too many different variables come into play...

Ticket sales cannot automatically translate into actual dollars between different eras.

Using your logic Shrek 2 was a better movie than The Lion King or Snow White.

No using my logic means that Shrek 2 was more successful at the box-office than The Lion King and Snow White.

And that statement is true...

just the fact that it seems using adjusted inflation figures, Snow White grossed more.

The fact still remains that The Lion King is Disney's highest grossing 2D animated movie in actual dollars.

Not sure what the debate is here?

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

They have to do with the film because they were being compared with The Lion King in the eyes of critics both in terms of box office numbers and their supposed lack of quality.

Get over yourself.

It's obvious the only true problem you have with The Lion King is nothing more than a personal problem that's not rooted in fact.

If you don't like the movie for your own personal reasons and think that it's overrated then that's your problem...

But don't try and pass your personal opinion off as anything other than what it is... A personal problem.

 

[WDW1974]

Actually, that's not correct at all. Read any business book on Disney (there are plenty of them) and you'll find that's not the case. By the time the Lion King came out, Disney was already firmly established as having made a huge comeback in the field of animation. In fact, Lion King was anything but "one of the reasons" they made the comeback. In reality, it was really the peak for Disney animation in terms of box office earnings, but critically, it was the beginning of the decline. The movie that is generally credited as being responsible for the comeback was Little Mermaid. That was followed by Beauty and the Beast, which surpassed Little Mermaid in terms of earnings as well as critical acclaim (becoming the first and only animated feature to ever be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar). Aladdin followed B&B and made even more money. It was really those three films that encompassed the true "golden age" of Disney. Many industry experts tend to agree that The Lion King's success was largely built upon the reputation that it's predecessor films had created. So from that standpoint, "overrated" is actually a pretty accurate word to describe The Lion King. Most of the features that followed it (i.e. Pocahontas, Hunchback, etc) aren't generally films that are fondly remembered, nor did they capture the box office success of the previous films. So if anything, Lion King was kind of the beginning of Disney's image being hurt, and it signaled the beginning of a decline in quality of their animated films (luckily, they had their partnership with Pixar, which came along a few years later and helped to boost the image again). Not coincidentally, it was around this time that Jeffrey Katzenberg left Disney to form Dreamworks. Katzenberg was renowned for being immersed in making sure the animated films were done to perfection. His departure was a huge loss for Disney animation.

I largely agree with all you wrote above.

I certainly agree that TLK hailed the high point of the second Golden Age of Disney animation (hopefully the third is about to begin!) ... it certainly did in terms of mega-box office receipts.

It's kind of ironic that Pocahontas, a film I enjoyed a lot but wasn't that good when compared with predecessors, debuted in '95 and wasn't able to build on the record-setting performance of Lion King and just six months later a little studio working with Disney released a small film by the name of 'Toy Story.' ... It was almost a passing of a baton, so to speak.

I do think, though, that some fans are a bit too critical of Disney's releases in the mid to late 90s. There were some awfully good films that opened ... the Hunchback of Notre Dame was as good as anything Disney did in the 90s (music, story, animation) but because of its dark overtones isn't as fondly remembered as some. I found it amazing myself.

Hercules took a totally different direction but artistically and in storytelling, but was still a lot of fun.

Mulan was wonderful too ... more special since it came out of FAF.

Tarzan wasn't bad either ...

But, yeah, the pinnacle was certainly in the late 80s/early 90s ... and things totally began to fall apart in the late 90s into this decade.

 

[wvdisneyfamily]

I dont care what anyone says i still love lion king and it is not overrated =D

The Lion King is based on what Shakespeare play? (I'm an English teacher so this is some great trivia for me.)