As of February, guests will no longer be able to see a trained Disney Artist who is d

[Scooter]

I have some questions...

1) Does a "Real" Riverboat Captain run the Liberty Belle Riverboat?
2) Do "Real" Scientists run the Imagination Institute?
3) Do "Real" Astronauts Explain the "Mission" on Mission Space?
4) Do "Real" Race Car Drivers load the Tomorrowland Indy Speedway?
5) Do "Real" Roadies and Band Managers load you into limos in RockNRoller Coaster starring Aerosmith?
6) Did "Real" Doctors and Nutritionists entertain us in The Wonders of Life?
7) Do you have to have "Real" Hotel/Motel experiance to get hired to work on the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror?

If the answer is yes to all the above..then I totally agree that all the Animators in the MGM Magic of Disney Animation Tour attraction should be allowed to stay on their jobs, at their current pay.

 

[barnum42]

I have some questions...

1) Does a "Real" Riverboat Captain run the Liberty Belle Riverboat?
2) Do "Real" Scientists run the Imagination Institute?
3) Do "Real" Astronauts Explain the "Mission" on Mission Space?
4) Do "Real" Race Car Drivers load the Tomorrowland Indy Speedway?
5) Do "Real" Roadies and Band Managers load you into limos in RockNRoller Coaster starring Aerosmith?
6) Did "Real" Doctors and Nutritionists entertain us in The Wonders of Life?
7) Do you have to have "Real" Hotel/Motel experiance to get hired to work on the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror?

None of the above were marketed as being attractions where you got to meet a real riverboat captain, genuine fictitious scientist, astronaut with wings, experienced NASCAR driver, battle hardened roadie crew, qualified MDs or hotel operatives on less than minimum wages.

The Animation tour was a tour of real facilities where you could meet and talk to real animators. It may surprise you to find that people were inspired talking to these unique talented individuals.

 

[General Grizz]

None of the above were marketed as being attractions where you got to meet a real riverboat captain, genuine fictitious scientist, astronaut with wings, experienced NASCAR driver, battle hardened roadie crew, qualified MDs or hotel operatives on less than minimum wages.

The Animation tour was a tour of real facilities where you could meet and talk to real animators. It may surprise you to find that people were inspired talking to these unique talented individuals.

Bingo.

 

[Scooter]

None of the above were marketed as being attractions where you got to meet a real riverboat captain, genuine fictitious scientist, astronaut with wings, experienced NASCAR driver, battle hardened roadie crew, qualified MDs or hotel operatives on less than minimum wages.

The Animation tour was a tour of real facilities where you could meet and talk to real animators. It may surprise you to find that people were inspired talking to these unique talented individuals.

The key word you use here is "Was". Disney no longer makes full length animated features at Disney/MGM Studios anymore, so in my opinion, keeping these talented artists around just for show and tell is both a waste of their talents and an insult to their profession.

I don't have to talk to a pilot to know I want to be one..I just have to look up in the sky or go to an airshow to see how skillful they are at their jobs to see how great the job is.

As a child, evey time I saw a Disney Movie or cartoon it inspired me and made me want to be an artist.
I took 4 years of art class in HS because of it and got straight A's.
Although I went on to choose a differant profession in life, I still use my artistic abilities to make home made greeting cards and oil paintings.
My art is a form of relaxation for me now. I still enjoy making hand drawn cards for my friends and I owe that to the Disney Artists.
While actually meeting an Artist is a plus, it's not a prerequisite for wanting to become an artist some day.

The cartoons, the movies and the comic strips are the legacy Disney artists leave behind and are what inspired me to consider Cartooning as a career.

I truly admire these Artists, and I was mortified when they stopped making animated movies at Disney/MGM. I used to get kicked out of the Animation tour for hanging around too long watching these guys at work.

If these guys were allowed to stay and draw Mickey Mouse over and over for Tourists in this degrading senerio, how long do you think it would be before they themselves would get bored?

I know I wouldn't stick around long if it were the case for me.

Do these guys touch peoples lives? Of course they do;
but for me personally, I find that seeing a great Disney artist reduced to drawing Mickey and friends over and over, day after day for tourists...well frankly I find the thought kind of sad.

 

[General Grizz]

The key word you use here is "Was". Disney no longer makes full length animated features at Disney/MGM Studios anymore, so in my opinion, keeping these talented artists around just for show and tell is both a waste of their talents and an insult to their profession.

Obviously, the artists don't feel insulted by staying. . . they are the ones that posted here.

The point of the Animation Academy is to draw. If Disney is KEEPING the Academy, but FIRING the artists, THAT'S an insult to their profession.

 

[Scooter]

Obviously, the artists don't feel insulted by staying. . . they are the ones that posted here.

The point of the Animation Academy is to draw. If Disney is KEEPING the Academy, but FIRING the artists, THAT'S an insult to their profession.

First of all, I think the Disney Artists originally posted here out of frustration and anger over losing their jobs...and I don't blame them..I'd be upset too.

...and secondly, It's not REALLY an Academy is it?
There's no REAL tests, no college credits, no grading...it's no more an academy than the Briefing room in Mission Space is real.

Lets let these talented artists leave MGM with dignity and the pride in knowing that the Movies they created will be their legacy and provide a lasting memory to the millions who they inspired with their work.
I wish them all good luck in their new endeavers and I can only hope that the latest Disney management decisions havn't left a permanent bad taste in their mouths for the Disney company as a whole.
I for one am proud of these artists and I know that some day... Disneys bad decisions will come back to bite them in the butt.

 

[ClemsonTigger]

True, Disney does not do animation at MGM any more. Why do we have a backstage tour when there is no longer a hint of backstage? Walt is also no longer around so why maintain his office, and Disney hasn't won any awards lately, so lets put away those dusty statues from the Academy, Grammy's and others. What they have done to the artists they are also doing to imagineers. Lets just contract rides out or put an overlay on a stock coaster. It's a whole lot better on the business sheet to just contract these out giving us rides like Great Adventure.

We are starting to loose our artist engineers to the same mentality you are talking about with the artists. Where will the future attractions of the parks be without imagineers? Then we can contract out the hotels to Marriott and Hilton, food service to McDonalds and whomever else and we can get rid of all those pesky Cast Members.

 

[speck76]

The key word you use here is "Was". Disney no longer makes full length animated features at Disney/MGM Studios anymore, so in my opinion, keeping these talented artists around just for show and tell is both a waste of their talents and an insult to their profession.

I tend to agree....the key word is "WAS"

The new attraction is no longer marketed that way........

 

[barnum42]

The new attraction is no longer marketed that way........

Well Disney are not exactly going to market it as "Come see where we used to make some decent films but decided to knacker the legacy of Disney, so insted you can watch a college kid trace goofy's head instead of meeting some real animators"

I'm just hoping these animators are doing alright for themselves away from Disney.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Well Clemson

I would agree completely with you about what makes Disney Disney. I too am disheartened at times, by the apparent direction of attractions, (thrill rides), and the loss of the more traditional, if you will, Disney rides and attractions. But I think you have to ask yourself, how much is too much? What I mean is this. If Disney is to continue to break ground on innovative technology, and ground-breaking animation, do they really need this type of attraction for their guests of the parks? Yes, I agree it does give you insight into what MADE Disney. No arguement there. But what IF Disney decided that EVERY ride and attraction were special, and therefore, could NEVER be removed. Haven't ALL the rides and attractions throughout Disneys' history somehow played a part in the success of Disney over the years? Couldn't that arguement be made?

Again, I don't agree with people being put out of work. I don't like it when some ride or attraction that has been around for years, gets taken away from all of us. But Disney does have to continue to move forward in its thinking, or get left behind by competitors.

I think to simply blame Eisner and greed on this one, is too narrow a viewpoint. NOT that that is what you were saying, mind you. But others on here have.


Just my thoughts.

 

[barnum42]

I think to simply blame Eisner and greed on this one, is too narrow a viewpoint. NOT that that is what you were saying, mind you. But others on here have.

As someone who has said that, I stick by it.

Just my "narrow" thoughts.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Barnum

What I meant is that to blame Eisner and greed is too narrow a viewpoint on this subject. I don't mean to say that the person stating that is narrow-minded. As a matter of fact, I didn't SAY that. I think the problems here are much larger than just that one issue.

 

[prberk]

The key to moving on successfully, especially at The Walt Disney Company, is balance. You have to balance innovation with a sincere understanding of and love for the past.

Walt even demonstrated this in the very design of Disneyland (and MK): Tomorrowland is balanced on the other side by Frontierland; and to ge to the world of dreams (Fantasyland), you must first start with a trip through memory lane (Main Street, USA).

This thinking pervaded Disney's thoughts and ideas, and it is the cornerstone of what built the company.

Moving forward in technology is great, but it must not be done at the cost of selling out and lopping off the lessons of the past. The Disney Story itself has always been a a part of what made its products appealing and gave it the goodwill and "brand identity" that the business school graduates like to note. Problem is, it cannot be bought. It took time to build, and will die without being nurtured.

Short-term gains that come at the cost of nurturing Disney's identity and quality will eventually cause the company to lose its edge and become an also-ran. We saw it already with the animation department overall (versus Pixar, where Disney's own past is better revered than at Team Disney, yet is highly innovative). Let's hope it does not happen in the imagineering department.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

I agree PrBerk

I agree with your assessment of having balance in this tough equation that Disney faces year in and year out. I think though that sometimes, people are so emotional about their personal favorites, that it clouds their better judgement. I don't like things like seasonal operation of rides/attractions, or the loss of certain rides/attractions, but again, I do understand it from a business perspective. I don't think that because in some cases, they move forward, that it means they are attempting to forget the past. BUT, in most cases, they don't have the choice. What I mean is this: If you are imagineering, if you will, a new attraction, you do so on whatever the premise of that attraction is. For example, if it's tied to a new movie release, then you have to move out the old and bring in the new, if there isn't suffiicient space to build the new ride. That doesn't mean that you are forgetting whatever that old ride was, and what it brought to the magic, and by extension, the history of Disney. But it is a sign of progress, and the growth of the company in some respects. I didn't like it when If You Had Wings fell by the wayside, but the new attraction in its place has been very successful. And it turns out being a good thing in the long run, and ties in nicely with the area, and movies. (BUZZ).

So I don't buy into the notion that Disney is ALWAYS selling out when they move out an old attraction for a new one. I think the times require that you sometimes move forward. Now, I would be careful to say that I DO believe that Disney should continue to foster and produce the family values that I believe that Walt Disney believed in with regard to his PARKS.

 

[prberk]

One more thing: as for Scooter's post #101 on the last page (concerning "real" scientists, artists, etc., in the attractions), actually EPCOT used to have REAL scientists around, and an attraction where REAL imagineers visited with you... and that was EXACTLY what most inspired me as a child about Disney. In bringing the real thing to you in a fun and interesting "show" environment, it really really made a difference.

And that is exactly what Disney did that set it apart from simply any other amusement park: they masterfully blended simple fun and vacation with something real to take home. It was the difference between empty diversion and true inspiration... all the while uplifting the family as a whole.

Barnum has been right all along in this column. There is a subtle difference between profit and greed; and the man who knows the difference profits most in the end.

 

[prberk]

Thanks for your reply, Henny. I appreciate your remarks, and in general I think we agree on balancing innovation and nurturing and understanding of the past (so that we build on it rather than forgetting the lessons of it).

I guess I am still most cautious of Disney lopping off things that are unique and hard to replace. And I don't feel that David Stainton (chief of animation) understands what he has in what he once called his sandbox. It is more than pixels versus pencils. That may be another topic, but it informs my concerns overall. Thanks for reading.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

You're most welcome Pr. I think it's true that some of those in charge at Disney have clearly demonstrated that they DON'T know what they have in a lot of cases. But that's where the danger of growing a company in the way that they have can be bad for certain areas of the company. Now there are so many to answer to at every level, that it's impossible to serve all. Too many masters to serve in the case of Disney.

From ABC/ESPN to Pixar, to Miramax, to the pro sports teams, park guests, etc. etc. etc. It makes the decisions very very difficult, and most often, half will hate the decision made, and half will understand it.

While I understand the need to grow a company to avoid hostile takeovers, and the like, you begin to sever loyalties among too many allies. Which compromises the overall quality of the product.

 

[9oldmen]

I don't know what's going on...

When I go into work tomorrow I'm going to ask the guests why did they come to The Magic of Didney Animation attraction? I'm going to also ask them if they knew that the studio was closed January of 2004? My last question to them will be, do you want someone who has a degrading job as a real artists or animator teach you how to draw or would you want me to take one of my drawings and put a clean sheet of paper over it and let someone out of the audience come trace over my lines and teach you how to draw?
We're missing the point!
The attaction is not closing and it's not about 2D vs. 3D!
Instead of jumping into the middle of a thread.... read everyones comments. The attraction has made more money every year because of the artists. The attraction hasn't lost money, how many times do we have to say this?
The Florida Studio didn't close because of 3D animation it closed for reasons that I'm not going to go into, I'm not going to feed someones appetite about what happened to the studio!
If you want to know how good 3D animation is with our company wait untill Chicken Little is a flop like that movie with the Dinasaur's in it. Let's see how good the company does with Toy Story 3! Pixar's not going to produce it, Walt Disney Feature Animation is going to produce it (laugh).

The guest already know about what's going on thanks to this website and others and I guess we artists that have degrading jobs drawing for the guests might have an opportunity to stay with the company. And as I mentioned before animators are actors, some are good and some are not so great. We're in the The Drawn To Animation part of the attraction to make a conection with the guests unlike the attraction in California that will allow the actor who isn't an artist or animator to leave the stage. Yes, in California, there's a door that they actually run to to get away from the guests. We stay on stage to follow the 7 service guidelines. We have great coversations with the gusets. The same groups that we did shows for take a class with us. oh yeah, the Academy isn't real, but I find it interesting how people try to find work through the Academy and it's amazing how so many kids cry over something not real. I mean, no ones getting graded in the class.
We're missng the point! We need to understand why the thread was put up. The thread was put up because we wanted you the guests to know what the company decided and see if that's what you want, is that what you're going to settle for, crap instead of quality.
I don't think Gen. Griz and many others would settle for less. Visit the attraction and check out how cheap it looks! Compare it to other attractions, especially the one in california and see how much effort the company put in it! It's not just about us. It's about cheating the intelligence of the guest that visit this attraction.

 

[barnum42]

It's about cheating the intelligence of the guest that visit this attraction.

Sounds like a bean-counting suit to me - "What can we get away with?" rather than "What can we offer?"

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Well 9

I can't speak for everyone but, I KNOW that I personally have NEVER said that being an artist/animator was a degrading job. On the contrary, my Wifes' dream is to do just that type of work for Disney. You mentioned that you wouldn't go into the reasons behind the Fla. Studio closing, but I feel it is imperative that you do. If you lend no background as to YOUR reasons why the studio was closed, you leave the door open for the rest of us to debate on the reasons why. Some of which seem very offensive to you, but for myself, I haven't been offensive toward you or your profession. What I HAVE continued to say is that I can understand from a business perspective why Disney would make the decision to close the Fla. Studio.

You say that the studios made more money every year due to the artists. Can you provide any "generic" figures to prove that? Or do we just take you at your word? Even if they did make more gross dollars, what was the expense each of those years. In most retail environments the general goal is to bump your sales goals by 15 percent each year. And at the same time, the expense will go up accordingly. These figures ARE general in nature I know. My point is this. Maybe the business was better each year, but at what cost? Maybe, just maybe, after all the checks were written, you were actually losing money. That IS possible you know. And unless you are privy to daily sales figures AND EXPENSES, to comment by simply saying that the studio made more money each year, I believe, is misleading.

Again, no one here is HAPPY that these changes have taken place. On the contrary, I believe most of us would rather that in THIS particular case, that NO changes be made. But the reality is that in business, as in life, things change. Progress must be made, and the road can become littered with victims. But you're only a victim in this situation, if that's what you CHOOSE to be.

Think about it.