Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I already talked about this before, but after seeing Deadpool 3, the most self-referential and self-promoting entry in the series, it's clear that this trend is impacting all divisions of the company and everything Disney does*.
We're past concerns about too many sequels and IP only rides. Now every type of media put out by the company has to reference something else. Nothing exists or stands on its own anymore. Everything is a tribute, callback, homage, whatever to something that came before it. Individually, they may be touching or amusing, but collectively, repeatedly, they grow tiresome. Wish was the most egregious example of this, but it's hardly alone. Brandy plays Cinderella again in the latest Descendants movie. The Disney+ Tiana show will be connected to the ride. The Hall of Presidents is dedicated to Walt Disney**. DVC towers are tied into Walt's travels, or rejected construction ideas. Now there are rumors that CoP will reference Horizons, an attraction the company would never build today, was left to rot, for a park they said was insufficiently "Disney". The only consistency is mining the past and working it into every future project, regardless of how that entity was treated at the time of its debut or how it even makes sense in the context of the newer offering. How long before the direct-to-video movies get propped up this way?
And people are eating it up, especially when it comes to things like Country Bears or Small World. Relics of another era that the current generation of fans and Imagineers have no attachment to (How old were they when Disneyland's CBJ closed in 2001?) and only love in hindsight when the company highlights and reimagines them as "Disney"
It's maddening because Walt himself was notoriously eccentric and obsessive about all sorts of ideas. Leonard Maltin has talked about this before, and how the studio's library is full of interesting gems that resulted from this, but it goes beyond movies. The company's history likes to play up the gambles that paid off in the biggest way (Snow White, Disneyland), but his career is full of projects that had no obvious monetary return, didn't return their investment for years (or never) or didn't continue a trend or through line. He didn't just say "you can't top pigs with pigs", he moved on from cartoon pigs to city planning. Which makes zero sense, unless your Walt Disney.
Asha should have wished for the company to get over itself and back to thinking outside their self imposed box.
*Deadpool did it first and better. The new movie is fun, but I can't disagree with those who feel its too self-indulgent in its fan service
**a nice idea, but a clear example of hand holding the audience because we're so far removed from the Disney of the 60s that we now have explain to the guests why an opening day WDW exclusive show is still there. It has to be given explicit "Disney" content or branding
We're past concerns about too many sequels and IP only rides. Now every type of media put out by the company has to reference something else. Nothing exists or stands on its own anymore. Everything is a tribute, callback, homage, whatever to something that came before it. Individually, they may be touching or amusing, but collectively, repeatedly, they grow tiresome. Wish was the most egregious example of this, but it's hardly alone. Brandy plays Cinderella again in the latest Descendants movie. The Disney+ Tiana show will be connected to the ride. The Hall of Presidents is dedicated to Walt Disney**. DVC towers are tied into Walt's travels, or rejected construction ideas. Now there are rumors that CoP will reference Horizons, an attraction the company would never build today, was left to rot, for a park they said was insufficiently "Disney". The only consistency is mining the past and working it into every future project, regardless of how that entity was treated at the time of its debut or how it even makes sense in the context of the newer offering. How long before the direct-to-video movies get propped up this way?
And people are eating it up, especially when it comes to things like Country Bears or Small World. Relics of another era that the current generation of fans and Imagineers have no attachment to (How old were they when Disneyland's CBJ closed in 2001?) and only love in hindsight when the company highlights and reimagines them as "Disney"
It's maddening because Walt himself was notoriously eccentric and obsessive about all sorts of ideas. Leonard Maltin has talked about this before, and how the studio's library is full of interesting gems that resulted from this, but it goes beyond movies. The company's history likes to play up the gambles that paid off in the biggest way (Snow White, Disneyland), but his career is full of projects that had no obvious monetary return, didn't return their investment for years (or never) or didn't continue a trend or through line. He didn't just say "you can't top pigs with pigs", he moved on from cartoon pigs to city planning. Which makes zero sense, unless your Walt Disney.
Asha should have wished for the company to get over itself and back to thinking outside their self imposed box.
*Deadpool did it first and better. The new movie is fun, but I can't disagree with those who feel its too self-indulgent in its fan service
**a nice idea, but a clear example of hand holding the audience because we're so far removed from the Disney of the 60s that we now have explain to the guests why an opening day WDW exclusive show is still there. It has to be given explicit "Disney" content or branding
