Cash-Strapped Disney

Mainahman

Well-Known Member
I donā€™t hate either of them. I actually liked Iger till the Star Wars takeover.

But thereā€™s just something insincere about the brand they created in the 2010s. Itā€™s just not quite Disney. I feel like there was a shift from preserving Walt Disneyā€™s legacy to building Bob Igerā€™s legacy. I donā€™t necessarily blame him, but I donā€™t really care. Itā€™s not why Iā€™m a Disney fan. The modern Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel, And Star Wars often fails to make the same emotional connection itā€™s predecessors did. Itā€™s almost too calculated.

Maybe Chapek is just Iger Jr. until Big Bob leaves the chair. Maybe not. Maybe Dā€™Amaro is what the company needs to feel like it has more soul. Or maybe, they need someone who we donā€™t even know about.
Agree totally here. Its hard to Say. D'Amaro seems legit, and good with the cast, but would he cave to the board pressure? Is what we see of Chapek really Iger using him as a puppet? Its hard to say.
 

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
I donā€™t hate either of them. I actually liked Iger a lot, till the Star Wars takeover.

But thereā€™s just something insincere about the brand they created in the 2010s. Itā€™s just not quite Disney. I feel like there was a shift from preserving Walt Disneyā€™s legacy to building Bob Igerā€™s legacy. I donā€™t necessarily blame him, but I donā€™t really care. Itā€™s not why Iā€™m a Disney fan. The modern Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel, And Star Wars often fails to make the same emotional connection itā€™s predecessors did. Itā€™s almost too calculated.

Maybe Chapek is just Iger Jr. until Big Bob leaves the chair. Maybe not. Maybe Dā€™Amaro is what the company needs to feel like it has more soul. Or maybe, they need someone who we donā€™t even know about.

So much here to unpack thats suspect at best.

1) Other than purchase it, what has Iger done personally to affect Star Wars?

2) Iger's legacy is turning Disney into a modern behemoth. But he's largely for the most part kept it from being looked at as anything other than Walt's company. You see with a lot of CEOs how they just try to get out there and make everything about them personally. Iger hasn't really done that (except for his book).

3) What do you consider Modern? I mean, are you saying Moana doesn't have an emotional connection? Or TS4, or Incredibles 2? Or Coco? Inside Out? Star Wars is just a different type of connection from those movies, which can still be emotional but its not the same type that Pixar and Disney animation is known for.

4) Chapek will be worse if he's left to his own devices, not better. When the company runs best in the past, it was with the 'magic' guy and the 'money' guy. Hopefully Chapek and D'Amaro learn to do that together.
 

Brer Oswald

Well-Known Member
Agree totally here. Its hard to Say. D'Amaro seems legit, and good with the cast, but would he cave to the board pressure? Is what we see of Chapek really Iger using him as a puppet? Its hard to say.
Actions speak louder than words. So when one of them says some sort of corporate mumbo jumbo, I roll my eyes but I try not to take it too seriously. Putting myself in their shoes, I completely get it.

Chapek and Dā€™Amaro really got a raw deal with the pandemic. I hope Josh gets more than 5 years because I want to see what heā€™s able to do when the money isnā€™t tight.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
A question....

With the financials not being as strong as desired, are we going to see a reevaluation of previous mindsets now that the green rubber stamp is running out of ink? Is the company going to take more time to work on projects to optimize their return rather than rushing mistakes. Such as unwanted IP injection, the Kennedy Star Wars debacle, leaning on The Rock to carry movies, and canceling marque attractions while the park is closed/trying to re-open. I feel Iger is not far from making clam shell sequels to every movie in the catalog to dangle the Disney+ carrot.

Or is this the last days of Eisner 2.0?
He may do something desperate and short sighted like remaking all their old movies or rebooting marquee franchises that isnā€™t necessary...
 

SilentWindODoom

Well-Known Member
Don't care.

What DO you want, then?

Nothing wrong with a musical teaching History. Ideally Hall of Presidents and Mr. Lincoln would remain dignified presentations.

I feel like imagineers got it perfect with the current version of HOP. It feels like a modern day documentary (which are still extremely popular... Ken Burns for example) come to life.

I admit to not having seen it since watching a video when the Trump version finally opened, but when I did I was greatly disappointed. I absolutely loved the Freeman version, and thought it was a gripping and spine-tingling presentation. The new one lost a lot of this. Tony Goldmark discussed the important points of this new version, but it still kinda disappoints me.

Iā€™d also add that I think silly versions of history like the muppets can also have a place in the parks. Liberty Square ideally has something for everyone.

- a presidential museum (the waiting area)
- the Hall of Presidents theatrical and historical presentation
- the muppets presenting a fun look at American history
- the riverboat presenting historical transportation
- the haunted mansion - not historic just a great Disney e-ticket.

If you add in some period specific live music youā€™d have the perfect balance of a Disney park land.

Doesn't the fife and drum corps come out a couple times a day? Or was that cut?

Iā€™m honestly shocked theyā€™ve never done a ā€œSnow Whiteā€™s Castleā€. Seems like a no brainer.

Cinderella's castle is where a lot of important parts of the story take place and Sleeping Beauty's castle is Aurora's. The most featured castle in Snow White is the Evil Queen's keep. The castle Snow and the Prince wind up in is only seen in the closing shot, which oddly looks like a depiction of Heaven more than anything.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Cinderella's castle is where a lot of important parts of the story take place and Sleeping Beauty's castle is Aurora's. The most featured castle in Snow White is the Evil Queen's keep. The castle Snow and the Prince wind up in is only seen in the closing shot, which oddly looks like a depiction of Heaven more than anything.

That being said, I'm a little surprised one of the new parks didn't get "Belle's castle" as a central icon. Would have made sense for Hong Kong.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
I admit to not having seen it since watching a video when the Trump version finally opened, but when I did I was greatly disappointed. I absolutely loved the Freeman version, and thought it was a gripping and spine-tingling presentation. The new one lost a lot of this. Tony Goldmark discussed the important points of this new version, but it still kinda disappoints me.

I liked that version too. Technically they did some really neat things with the current version although i feel the audio is off because it doesnā€™t sound like the actual presidents are speaking anymore.

Doesn't the fife and drum corps come out

That got moved to epcot and then cut.
 

Brer Oswald

Well-Known Member
So much here to unpack thats suspect at best.

1) Other than purchase it, what has Iger done personally to affect Star Wars?

2) Iger's legacy is turning Disney into a modern behemoth. But he's largely for the most part kept it from being looked at as anything other than Walt's company. You see with a lot of CEOs how they just try to get out there and make everything about them personally. Iger hasn't really done that (except for his book).

3) What do you consider Modern? I mean, are you saying Moana doesn't have an emotional connection? Or TS4, or Incredibles 2? Or Coco? Inside Out? Star Wars is just a different type of connection from those movies, which can still be emotional but its not the same type that Pixar and Disney animation is known for.

4) Chapek will be worse if he's left to his own devices, not better. When the company runs best in the past, it was with the 'magic' guy and the 'money' guy. Hopefully Chapek and D'Amaro learn to do that together.
1) I donā€™t really care about Star Wars. Theyā€™re entertaining films, but thatā€™s as far as it goes for me. So Iā€™m a little tired of the company shoving it down my throat like itā€™s the only thing I should care about. Mickey is the mascot of Disney, not BB-8. People often go ā€œDisney ruined Star Warsā€. But I think the purchase itself has more of a profound effect on Disney.

2) Igerā€™s legacy is the purchases. Thatā€™s why you see Woody, the Avengers, and the Star Wars cast at the forefront. As for Disney Animation, all you see is Elsa, Anna, the Snowman, And Moana. Whereā€™s Jimminy Cricket? Whereā€™s the Dwarfs? Whereā€™s Winnie the Pooh? Thereā€™s so many Classic Disney characters that were cast to the far background when the buyouts occurred.

3) An emotional connection is beyond that of making me tear up a little bit because Iā€™m reminded of my deceased grandmother. They spend a little too much time trying to be relatable than creating compelling characters and music. And yeah, it strikes an emotional nerve, but it just makes me think about my real life connections more so than the movie. Itā€™s entertaining, but after Iā€™m finished watching, I feel nothing towards the movieā€™s characters.

4) Iger was a money guy first and foremost. Who was the magic guy? Or was he mostly a one man show?

I donā€™t want to be too negative cause it isnā€™t all bad. But itā€™s just a little frustrating to grow up as a Disney fan, and then be told you have to forget about all the classic stuff you loved and embrace all the new stuff and purchased stuff like itā€™s the only thing that matters. Thereā€™s enough room for both Classic and Modern.
 
Last edited:

rle4lunch

Well-Known Member
All patriotism in the parks has been cut due to it being racist. We're all bad bad people that have no right to be happy about the progress that we've made. Bad bad bad. Now go sit in the corner and color with opaque taupe crayons, and please, for all that is holy (er, better not say that, for all that is righteous, no, no, that's not right either, for all that is of non-binary importance!), don't include any cultural stigmas like curly hair, blue eyes, brown eyes, red hair, or colorful attire. Please, I beg of you, know accents either.

Remember, we're all bad, bad people.
 

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
1) I donā€™t really care about Star Wars. Theyā€™re entertaining films, but thatā€™s as far as it goes for me. So Iā€™m a little tired of the company shoving it down my throat like itā€™s the only thing I should care about. Mickey is the mascot of Disney, not BB-8. People often go ā€œDisney ruined Star Warsā€. But I think the purchase itself has more of a profound effect on Disney.

2) Igerā€™s legacy is the purchases. Thatā€™s why you see Woody, the Avengers, and the Star Wars cast at the forefront. As for Disney Animation, all you see is Elsa, Anna, the Snowman, And Moana. Whereā€™s Jimminy Cricket? Whereā€™s the Dwarfs? Whereā€™s Winnie the Pooh? Thereā€™s so many Classic Disney characters that were cast to the far background when the buyouts occurred.

3) An emotional connection is beyond that of making me tear up a little bit because Iā€™m reminded of my deceased grandmother. They spend a little too much time trying to be relatable than creating compelling characters and music. And yeah, it strikes an emotional nerve, but it just makes me think about my real life connections more so than the movie. Itā€™s entertaining, but after Iā€™m finished watching, I feel nothing towards the movieā€™s characters.

4) Iger was a money guy first and foremost. Who was the magic guy? Or was he mostly a one man show?

I donā€™t want to be too negative cause it isnā€™t all bad. But itā€™s just a little frustrating to grow up as a Disney fan, and then be told you have to forget about all the classic stuff you loved and embrace all the new stuff and purchased stuff like itā€™s the only thing that matters. Thereā€™s enough room for both Classic and Modern.

1) You didn't answer my question.

2) Yes, his legacy is the purchases which turned Disney into a behemoth. The largest entertainment company in the world. This is a fantastic legacy to have, and if it was any other company he'd be basically god. But Walt is Walt, and this is Disney. I don't know how much of a following Pooh has anymore. The Dwarves have a recent ride & clones. You can't focus on everyone at the same time.

3) Have you considered that maybe you've just outgrown some of this? I daresay that the ideas/issues presented in Inside Out and Up are far more adult and much higher level than 'classic' Disney Animation. I'm not putting down the classics, but Pixar movies have always done more to actually present deeper thoughts and meaning than something like Snow White. Not to say there aren't exceptions, but a lot of the classics are almost exclusively presented for kids while more modern stuff tries to reach all audiences.

4) Yes, he's done a lot of this on his own. He's done far better than any other CEO's 'solo' tenure, thats for sure.
 

Brer Oswald

Well-Known Member
1) You didn't answer my question.

2) Yes, his legacy is the purchases which turned Disney into a behemoth. The largest entertainment company in the world. This is a fantastic legacy to have, and if it was any other company he'd be basically god. But Walt is Walt, and this is Disney. I don't know how much of a following Pooh has anymore. The Dwarves have a recent ride & clones. You can't focus on everyone at the same time.

3) Have you considered that maybe you've just outgrown some of this? I daresay that the ideas/issues presented in Inside Out and Up are far more adult and much higher level than 'classic' Disney Animation. I'm not putting down the classics, but Pixar movies have always done more to actually present deeper thoughts and meaning than something like Snow White. Not to say there aren't exceptions, but a lot of the classics are almost exclusively presented for kids while more modern stuff tries to reach all audiences.

4) Yes, he's done a lot of this on his own. He's done far better than any other CEO's 'solo' tenure, thats for sure.
1) I donā€™t understand the relevance of this question. Iā€™m not a Star Wars fan. Although I enjoy the movies, Igerā€™s impact on that franchise has little interest to me. As a Disney fan, Iā€™m more focused on the changes the purchase makes to the Disney brand.

2) I donā€™t have much to debate here. You seem biased in favour of Iger and his properties. Iā€™m biased in favour of Waltā€™s. I donā€™t like the Avengers and Star Wars getting top billing over Mickey and the Classic Disney characters. Agree to disagree?

3) I donā€™t think Iā€™ve outgrown it. You mentioned Up, so Iā€™ll put the cutoff there cause I agree with that one. The only part of Inside Out to make me feel anything was the Bing Bing arc, but I find the character a little obnoxious in outside marketing. Maybe thatā€™s the issue? That the comic relief characters are a bit too obnoxious as of late? You could maybe blame all of this on nostalgia, but I donā€™t think so. I didnā€™t watch many of the classic catalogue, like Pinocchio and Bambi, until after I saw Frozen, Ralph, etc. But thereā€™s something about these classic films that I just prefer. Pinocchio is my favourite film. Iā€™m not sure why.

4) Statistically true. He doesnā€™t have much competition though. Roy was out as soon as Magic Kingdom opened. He was also in his seventies. Card Walker wasnā€™t really in long enough to prove himself, but he did good with the parks. Eisner fell off the chain, but we still got stuff like Animal Kingdom and Lilo & Stitch. Not amazing, but not all bad. Iger was a good CEO.
 

HongKongFooy

Well-Known Member
Well its a good thing the ride does not have the name "SPLASH" in it-oh wait it does. I don't think you understand why people go on water rides or why they are made. They are absolutely meant to wet and splash you a good amount

Not so fast with that.......... Tokyo Disney intentionally tamed their ride down to limit splashes on Splash. And the company wanted nothing to do with single file, terribly uncomfortable log straddling as well like in Anaheim's bumpy, sloppy, dark and dank earliest incarnation. Culturally soaking guests and having them sit like that ain't cool.

Reason number 27 to frequent TDR.
 

tirian

Well-Known Member
1) I donā€™t understand the relevance of this question. Iā€™m not a Star Wars fan. Although I enjoy the movies, Igerā€™s impact on that franchise has little interest to me. As a Disney fan, Iā€™m more focused on the changes the purchase makes to the Disney brand.

2) I donā€™t have much to debate here. You seem biased in favour of Iger and his properties. Iā€™m biased in favour of Waltā€™s. I donā€™t like the Avengers and Star Wars getting top billing over Mickey and the Classic Disney characters. Agree to disagree?

3) I donā€™t think Iā€™ve outgrown it. You mentioned Up, so Iā€™ll put the cutoff there cause I agree with that one. The only part of Inside Out to make me feel anything was the Bing Bing arc, but I find the character a little obnoxious in outside marketing. Maybe thatā€™s the issue? That the comic relief characters are a bit too obnoxious as of late? You could maybe blame all of this on nostalgia, but I donā€™t think so. I didnā€™t watch many of the classic catalogue, like Pinocchio and Bambi, until after I saw Frozen, Ralph, etc. But thereā€™s something about these classic films that I just prefer. Pinocchio is my favourite film. Iā€™m not sure why.

4) Statistically true. He doesnā€™t have much competition though. Roy was out as soon as Magic Kingdom opened. He was also in his seventies. Card Walker wasnā€™t really in long enough to prove himself, but he did good with the parks. Eisner fell off the chain, but we still got stuff like Animal Kingdom and Lilo & Stitch. Not amazing, but not all bad. Iger was a good CEO.
Pinocchio is widely considered one of the greatest movies ever made, animated or live-action. Thatā€™s why you liked it; itā€™s just that good. ;)

No offense to you at all ā€” Iā€™m always surprised when people claim to be huge Disney fans yet havenā€™t seen the classics Walt himself made. (I know you said you have seen them; Iā€™m talking about people with no interest whatsoever.) The originals are True Disney, made by either Walt himself or men and women he hand-picked. Without the classics, thereā€™d be no Disney ā€œmagic.ā€ If you want to understand the Castle parks and truly appreciate their depth, you have to know Waltā€™s own work.

If we skip over Disneyā€™s post-Walt dark period, essentially everything since the early ā€˜90s Renaissance is Disney Conglomerate, a situation Eisner created and Iger expanded. Some of it is great, earning their places as modern classics. Most of it was created to sell merch. Much of it is a copy of a copy of a copy. Precious little of it is as groundbreaking as Waltā€™s work.
 

Brer Oswald

Well-Known Member
Pinocchio is widely considered one of the greatest movies ever made, animated or live-action. Thatā€™s why you liked it; itā€™s just that good. ;)

No offense to you at all ā€” Iā€™m always surprised when people claim to be huge Disney fans yet havenā€™t seen the classics Walt himself made. (I know you said you have seen them; Iā€™m talking about people with no interest whatsoever.) The originals are Disney. Without them, thereā€™d be no Disney ā€œmagic.ā€ If you want to understand the Castle parks and truly appreciate their depth, you have to know Waltā€™s own work.

If we skip over Disneyā€™s post-Walt dark period, essentially everything since the early ā€˜90s Renaissance is Disney Conglomerate, a situation Eisner created and Iger expanded. Some of it is great, earning their places as modern classics. Most of it was created to sell merch. Much of it is a copy of a copy of a copy.
Yeah that all makes sense to me. Pinocchio is probably their best film.
 

tirian

Well-Known Member
Let me preface this post by saying I know much more than I'm going to say in this thread. That's just the way it's going to have to be in order to protect sources, prevent doxing, and keep jobs safe. Additionally, it lets those sharing info with me know that if something needs to be off the record, it will stay if the record.

The Disney company is currently hurting for cash, and not by a little. The absolute destruction of the global film industry means that Disney is losing billions and billions of usual expected revenues with no certain end in sight. Mulan has been pushed to the end of August, but even that still seems optimistic, and likely box office revenues may by as low as 20% of what it could have been. A burgeoning cold war with China likewise makes promoting the film an uncertain formula. The MCU is currently benched, live action Star Wars is on pause, Indiana Jones 5 is more unlikely daily, and there's simply no good path forward outside of the animation studios. Furthering the dearth of income, Disneyland was prepped to reopen at great expense, only to be indefinitely postponed yet again. The money to reopen Walt Disney World has been immense, but with increasing COVID infections in Florida, it seems more and more likely that increasing capacity will be a slow process, which means revenues for WDW will be lower than projected when the rush was approved to get the parks open fast. Adding to this, capex projects needing completing at WDW are substantial, more than ever in the past decade. Conflict has broken out inside Disney's top levels with some pushing for continued spending in new projects, such as Splash Mountain reskinning, while others are extremely bearish with a view that Disney should hold every possible dollar.

It is from within this paradigm that Disney is now struggling with public messaging not matching internal capabilities. For example, Splash Mountain changes were announced with little design ready to implement, based off of a blue sky design that had a concept art package quickly produced for social media advertising. Just one problem: the actuaries were not approached, nor were budgets forecast for the changes. In fact, you might say a rogue committee approved the decision without determining the cost or the feasibility... and then the company realizes the issue after public announcement. So what to do? As of now, the plan is to "quickly" change the DLR version, where it is more likely to be received positively, then use Epcot capex funds that would have gone to Mary Poppins and JII to change the superior WDW version starting in 2022 or 2023. However, hopes that Disney can plus the attraction are difficult to materialize with Imagineering already completely flummoxed how they can possibly reskin many dozens of animatronics in a crown jewel attraction. One imagineer has compared the task to retheming Pirates of the Caribbean to a Jungle Book ride. Yet more attractions are likely to be modified, budgets be damned. This has created friction even all the way to the Bobs with Iger doing everything he can to save his legacy, while Chapek tries not to be the fall guy while looking at a company in dire financial straits. Whereas Chapek wanted to spend the capital necessary to retrofit MK for a pandemic and then slowly open other parks as demand and money permitted, Iger overruled the plan and pushed for a full reopening to prevent Universal from getting the upper hand.

Now the company has greater inner turmoil than at any point in the recent past. Spending is continuing in spite of depression-like revenues projected for the remainder of the year... and often on new projects of a social nature (changes are coming to Hall of Presidents, Jungle Cruise, Country Bears, Pirates of the Carribean, Carousel of Progress, etc). This is coming from one or two factions in the company who share overlap. Other factions are scared the company is stretched thin and needs to hold spending as much as possible. Fear also exists that if relations with China deteriorate, the company could lose both Shanghai and Hong Kong. Not since WWII has uncertainty been so high. The cost of maintaining parks during a pandemic are significantly higher, yet raising ticket prices is nearly impossible.

Going forward, what does this mean?

1. Epcot changes are likely to be MUCH less than originally planned.
2. Layoffs are coming.
3. Announced additions are on very long timelines.
4. Disney World having to close again would be devastating.
5. OLC and Disney relations are strained; expect that to manifest in visible ways.
6. Every penny counts, and cost cutting measures can be expected within 12 months.
7?. Is Chapek the fall guy? Many are speculating Iger plans to use him as the scapegoat.
8. 50th celebration is essentially canceled down to only things that cost little... no new floats, no big refurbs.

Additional info on Splash:
This whole Splash Mountain thing was torpedoed by Tokyo. Disney wanted to get completely away from Song of the South, but OLC essentially told them to pound sand. That meant they're stuck spending enormous money just to match the current quality, and simultaneously NOT getting away from Song of the South. So the only gain they get is Tiana might sell better in the souvenir shop.
Thanks for the update! This matches about 90% of what my friends have told me, and none of it contradicts them, except Iā€™ll add some of the biggest controversy is arising between employees whoā€™ve earned their stripes (Mouse ears?) and know what theyā€™re talking about, and those who believe theyā€™re entitled simply for existing. Thatā€™s a common problem at most large companies and isnā€™t unique to Disney, but itā€™s causing problems in a corporation that thrives on quality and nostalgia.
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Pinocchio is widely considered one of the greatest movies ever made, animated or live-action. Thatā€™s why you liked it; itā€™s just that good. ;)

No offense to you at all ā€” Iā€™m always surprised when people claim to be huge Disney fans yet havenā€™t seen the classics Walt himself made. (I know you said you have seen them; Iā€™m talking about people with no interest whatsoever.) The originals are True Disney, made by either Walt himself or men and women he hand-picked. Without the classics, thereā€™d be no Disney ā€œmagic.ā€ If you want to understand the Castle parks and truly appreciate their depth, you have to know Waltā€™s own work.

If the internet has taught me anything about Disney, its that Millennial and Gen Z Disney fans do not care about anything pre-Little Mermaid, scorn Walt's animated work as racist/sexist and are largely oblivious to Disney live-action movies and television content. Their opinion on the parks is either "I can't afford to go" or those that can just blindly accept whatever is there when they visit. They're probably the least educated on the company's history and content, but spend the most money on merch. Go figure.

In Ye Olden Daeys, you had to pick up a BOOK [what's that?] like Leonard Maltin's The Disney Films or Dave Smith's Disney A to Z to learn about the history and now you have more information than ever online...and it's largely ignored.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom