Ayla
Well-Known Member
It's creepy and too much like Animaniacs.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Disney CFO Christine McCarthy says Disney will continue to focus on existing intellectual property for new park investments
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Ayla
Well-Known Member
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I personally love it! The new cartoons are very clever and charming, as is Runaway Railway.
Ayla
Well-Known Member
People aren't even talking about Avatar today...in the middle of the however-never ending-movie sequels.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Not Animaniacs, Animaniacs actually had some heart & depth and wasn’t constantly making a point to gross you out or be a psychotic as possible. It’s moreso Ren & Stimpy which ‘absolutely’ did that on all accounts. I don’t like it either. Mickey Mouse Works/House of Mouse actually got the balance right, I’d argue ‘that’ was more an Animaniacs style in that it respected the classic toons but simply brought a 40s/50s art direction mix while retaining the humor of the 30s era. But instead of having a more complex, balanced personality & humor like before. The new shorts are very one note.. that being psychotic & gross or on the pandering Clubhouse end, no personality or humor ‘at all’. I personally think, if you really wanted to harken strictly more towards classic Mickey. The Get A Horse or Epic Mickey direction would’ve been the best ways to go. Or, actually make new shorts ‘in’ the genuine classic 30s style without the needless “modernization”. But again.
Last edited:
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Now if we’re talking the Animaniacs ‘reboot’.. that’s another story. Then I’d agree that the new Mickey shorts are similar to that in a bad way. They’ve done something very similar to Animaniacs infact (with the awful ‘overly’ meta humor and literally making fun of/jabbing the very nature of the original show & characters in a way that leaves a bad taste in your mouth and/or takes you out of the show and it’s bad)… to the point they intentionally didn’t include Tom Ruegger to be the show runner as some producers/higher execs hate/hated the original show, hence why it’s the way it is. Ridiculous
(PS: notice a terrible trend in the industry rn regarding classic/well established IPs?)
(PS: notice a terrible trend in the industry rn regarding classic/well established IPs?)
Last edited:
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
I think the new cartoons are good but the art style is bad, I very much dislike the appearance of the new Mickey and think it misses what makes the Fab 4 work in the first place
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Mickey and his friends have gone through many iterations. In some ways, the new look harks back to the earliest design, albeit with a modern twist. The new shorts are among the best thing to come out of Disney in recent years.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Respectfully, I disagree. And that “modern twist” (more like mean spirited twist) I think is the problem.. it’s done almost cynically/jabbingly. It doesn’t feel respectful. Hence all the gross out gags and making fun of the very nature of said cartoons & characters like as if they were parodies rather than tastefully continuing them on in inventive ways (albeit new storylines/scenarios, gags, etc.) .
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. I find the self-referential humour affectionate and endearing, and in no way cynical. It's a series that celebrates and rewards Disney fan knowledge, created by people who are clearly familiar with, and enjoy engaging with, the company's rich history.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Right, but I think the new design is my least favorite among them. It's definitely very....mmmm...the comparison has been made to Renn & Stimpy, I think that's probably accurate.
I do enjoy the new shorts don't get me wrong, I just dislike that this is the new look for the characters being advertised across the company.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
The more familiar iterations are still the dominant ones. I personally think there's room for more than one look.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
I suppose you're right, but I think we'll just have to agree to disagree because I really dislike the look 100%. Like I wouldn't buy merch with this Mickey on it (not that I'm much of a merch buyer anyways) and don't even really enjoy the voice actor behind Mickey either.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Here’s the thing about that.. they’re used largely in imagery, but you notice they’re not making any new content with those more balanced 2D approaches that take the 40s/50s art styles mixed with the 30s type humor with some more modern references & tech here & there.
Sure, you could “maybe” count the Clubhouse/Funhouse shows in regard to art direction, but I’d hardly count them considering they’re entirely in CG along with the fact they feel considerably different than the Mickey Mouse Works/House of Mouse versions (including the short, Runaway Brain). Far, FAR less personality & humor… which is a BIG problem. That ‘that’ has became the main showcase of “modern Mickey” and nothing else. Infact, it’s ‘still’ a problem in those shorts not being on Disney Plus for whatever reason, despite the large outcry/demand to put them on the service… also notice the documentary makes no mention of them at all… hmm, fishy..
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
That stands to reason, because they're not actively producing any new shorts other than the Rudish ones.
Anyway, I'm happy to disagree.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Right, and ‘that’ right there I’d argue is a big, big problem. Let alone that the previously existing all-age appealing shorts featuring said Mickey aren’t available or acknowledged hardly at all… yet the pandering preschool stuff strictly is in regards to that era, But I’ll just leave it at that.
Last edited:
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Expensive misfires like Harmonious, Enchantment, the Starcruiser and even the NBA Experience illustrate how this company not only fails to understand its audience and business, it doesn't understand how IP can be used to enhance it either.
Leveraging IPs for a hospitality experience involves more than just slapping a brand on a building. The core experience has to deliver on what it promises. This is true whether we're talking about a hotel, a restaurant, a show or a ride. People have to feel what they're paying or waiting for lives up to their expectations. A hotel room with a bathroom that doesn't function for a family of 4, can't be saved by pictures of characters on the wall. A show that drags on and doesn't wow its audience can't be saved because it has a recognizable song half-way through. A ride won't be popular if it looks cheap and struggles to accommodate more than 1,000 people an hour.
This is where we're at with the company now. The people in charge are so out of touch with their hospitality business they not only blow money by failing to make timely and effective decisions, they don't know what to do with a hit movie when it lands in their lap. It's why we get reskins and not expansions. It's why it takes forever to build anything. It's why even no-brainer, sure hit concepts fall flat.
The company and its fans can spin all they want about how busy the parks are and that must be proof management is making the best decisions, but the cracks in the façade have been showing for a while now and its getting to the point where even casual observes are noticing. The "rare misfire" of the Starcruiser, is not so rare of late.
They want to use streaming analytics to inform park investments? Sure, they can do that, but it's no substitute for adequate training, industry insight, creative thinking, investment management or basic guest satisfaction. Until the company and its shareholders realize that, it won't matter how many Moana or Zootopia additions they build. They'll still end up playing shell games with pricing, marketing and operations to cover their underlying issues.
Leveraging IPs for a hospitality experience involves more than just slapping a brand on a building. The core experience has to deliver on what it promises. This is true whether we're talking about a hotel, a restaurant, a show or a ride. People have to feel what they're paying or waiting for lives up to their expectations. A hotel room with a bathroom that doesn't function for a family of 4, can't be saved by pictures of characters on the wall. A show that drags on and doesn't wow its audience can't be saved because it has a recognizable song half-way through. A ride won't be popular if it looks cheap and struggles to accommodate more than 1,000 people an hour.
This is where we're at with the company now. The people in charge are so out of touch with their hospitality business they not only blow money by failing to make timely and effective decisions, they don't know what to do with a hit movie when it lands in their lap. It's why we get reskins and not expansions. It's why it takes forever to build anything. It's why even no-brainer, sure hit concepts fall flat.
The company and its fans can spin all they want about how busy the parks are and that must be proof management is making the best decisions, but the cracks in the façade have been showing for a while now and its getting to the point where even casual observes are noticing. The "rare misfire" of the Starcruiser, is not so rare of late.
They want to use streaming analytics to inform park investments? Sure, they can do that, but it's no substitute for adequate training, industry insight, creative thinking, investment management or basic guest satisfaction. Until the company and its shareholders realize that, it won't matter how many Moana or Zootopia additions they build. They'll still end up playing shell games with pricing, marketing and operations to cover their underlying issues.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Oh TWDC is being run into the ground right now and to be honest, I'm here for it. As another poster stated, it's death by a thousand cuts. All the moves they make these days are anti-fan and anti-consumer. And they're starting to recieve backlash for it. I grew up a Disney fan and used to almost be kind of a 'pixie duster.' But now....look at my profile...you've seen what I say when I post.
For me it was ultimately Splash Mountain that killed any and all good will I had for the company. Prior to that I had some major issues for sure...their use of IP in the parks being probably the biggest one. But when they said they were shuttering Splash, a company I at least 'supported' and wanted to do well...became a company that I didn't
Last edited:
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
with you in full on that, well stated! Could not have said it any better.Oh TWDC is being run into the ground right now and to be honest, I'm here for it. As another poster stated, it's death by a thousand cuts. All the moves they make these days are anti-fan and anti-consumer. And they're starting to recieve backlash for it. I grew up a Disney fan and used to almost be kind of a 'pixie duster.' But now....look at my profile...you've seen what I say when I post.
For me it was ultimately Splash Mountain that killed any and all good will I had for the company. Prior to that I had some major issues for sure...their use of IP in the parks being probably the biggest one. But when they said they were shuttering Splash, a company I at least 'supported' and wanted to do well...became a company that I didn't