Disney nukes Janet

Tramp

Tramp

New Member
Original Poster
...from FoxNews.Com

ORLANDO, Fla. — The Walt Disney Co. has quietly shelved a life-size statue of Mickey Mouse inspired by singer Janet Jackson, who was roundly criticized for a risque Super Bowl halftime performance.



The 6-foot, 700-pound statue was one of 75 unveiled at Walt Disney World in Orlando last fall to celebrate the 75th birthday of Mickey Mouse. The statues were inspired by celebrities such as tennis star Andre Agassi, actress Jamie Lee Curtis and comedian Ellen DeGeneres .

The statue inspired by Jackson was clad in a tight black outfit similar to one she wore in 1990 after the release of her album, Rhythm Nation 1928 . It was replaced by a spare statue designed by Luis Fernandez, an in-house Disney artist.

"Considering all the controversy it drew, we talked it over for a couple of days and decided it would be best to replace hers with a new one," Gary Foster, a Disney spokesman, told the Orlando Sentinel.

Foster didn't immediately return a phone call to The Associated Press.

Jackson's bump-and-grind performance with singer Justin Timberlake during last month's Super Bowl was capped by Timberlake ripping a piece of clothing off to reveal her breast.
 
GaryT977

GaryT977

New Member
Ridiculous over-reaction to a non-event. There was nothing offensive about that statue. Actually, it was one of my favorites. I thought it was really clever. I'm more upset that they removed the statues in the first place to try to help out Eisner's sagging fortunes.

Really, really sad and disgusting.
 
JBSLJames

JBSLJames

New Member
How trivial. Let's take a stand on a Jacksonized Mickey. How pathetic. And yet they let the one inspired by Marilyn Manson stay????
 
DisneySaint

DisneySaint

Well-Known Member
Well, is it possible that guests were doing things to the statue that maybe they shouldn't have? Just a wild guess ... I don't think even the Eisner-era Disney would just take down the statue due to some old-news / screaming soccer mom event.

I do think it's stupid to take it down, of course.
 
MartyMouse

MartyMouse

New Member
Take a stand!

I’m a little lost here???
As I see it most of you say that taking the statue away was wrong and some of you say it was a non-event and even defend Janet. However aren’t some of you the same people who blasted Eisner's values and accused him of being morally bankrupt not holding to Walt’s ideas in other forums?
So as far as I can infer – some of you think that Walt would have been ok with the way Janet “bumped and grinded” with Justin and he would have loved seeing her breast on his TV, right?

If you take a moral stand you must hold to it, no matter the circumstance.
 
he-guy

he-guy

Member
They wouldn't just pull the statue for no reason. Obviously there were families lodging complaints at City Hall while the statues were at the MK, or something to that affect. They are all gone now anyway...
 
NashvilleMouse

NashvilleMouse

New Member
This is something we should probably get used to. Now the FCC is sticking their noses in everything ever since the Super Bowl. It may have been petty but it is turning into a snowball effect. Don't call me a conspiracy theorist... but that's why the sequel to HBO's "$ex and the City" will now be called "Fornicating in a Suburb".
 
RogueHabit

RogueHabit

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Michael72688
This is rediculous, it was an accident that happened a month ago, get over it!
Click to expand...
Well no, it wasn't an accident. Both Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake eventually admitted that it had been staged, albeit at the last minute.

That said, I found the whole episode extremely amusing and I seriously doubt that my son will now become a manic ______ fiend just because he caught a 1 second of half exposed breast on the TV.

This is just further, over-reactive BS IMHO-OC.
 
BG Rugger

BG Rugger

New Member
While the moral side of the story could be argued until the cows come home, it was probably done to preserve the "family element" of Disney. Disney is a widely known and recognized family-oriented company, and probably would have drawn unwanted controversy for having the statue. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, but IMO its definately the reasoning behind the move.
 
M

Mary Poppins

Member
Originally posted by he-guy
They wouldn't just pull the statue for no reason. Obviously there were families lodging complaints at City Hall while the statues were at the MK, or something to that affect. They are all gone now anyway...
Click to expand...

I think you're misunderstanding. They didn't remove the statue from the park. It was there up until the last day the statues were there. Once they left Walt Disney World the powers that be decided to shelve Janet's statue from the shareholder's meeting and the tour. This wasn't because families were complaining about it. If that had been the case it would have been removed from the parks.
 
GaryT977

GaryT977

New Member
Originally posted by BG Rugger
While the moral side of the story could be argued until the cows come home, it was probably done to preserve the "family element" of Disney. Disney is a widely known and recognized family-oriented company, and probably would have drawn unwanted controversy for having the statue. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, but IMO its definately the reasoning behind the move.
Click to expand...


If that's the case, then why was Chairman Clench left so long in AE after the actor was arrested on child charges?

For anyone offended by that Mickey statue, tough titties. A 1.5 second nipple burst and this country goes into convulsions. THERE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS GOING ON!!!!

:brick: :brick: :brick:
 

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

Back
Top Bottom