Does Michael Jackson belong at WDW?

[GoofyFan1]

Your NO choice is too biased. What if you wanted to vote no because you don't think MJ deserves to be there just because he was MJ? I don't care about his other activities, I just don't think he needs to be brought back because of some bandwagon or sense of deserving.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Despite his alleged priest like tendencies Its better than a shuttered attraction, after all it should take some out of the Soarin and TT lines. Those of us who like music can just ignore the theatre and seek solace in the world showcase bars

 

[wizards8507]

Y'all are very particular about the structure of this poll. If I said, "Which do you prefer, Peter Pan's Flight, or Small World?," and you didn't like either ride, would you complain that the poll was unfair? No. You would either pick the best answer available to you or you would refrain from answering the poll.

 

[Mr. Morrow]

Y'all are very particular about the structure of this poll. If I said, "Which do you prefer, Peter Pan's Flight, or Small World?," and you didn't like either ride, would you complain that the poll was unfair? No. You would either pick the best answer available to you or you would refrain from answering the poll.

Thats a different questtion than asking if something belongs.

 

[wizards8507]

But the options are still available. Choose the best one, or don't answer. There's plenty of space to post your reservations if you fall in the "gray area."

 

[EpcotServo]

Captain Eo belongs in Epcot and Disneyland. It did in 1986, it does now. And until the flame wars of hate and botheredness convince me otherwise, Eo's a fun show with great music and a wonderful message.

 

[captainkidd]

His personal issues aren't the sticking point for me. I just always thought Captain EO was lame.

 

[raven]

His kids and newphews and nieces were here last weekend. :animwink:

 

[Courtney1188]

I voted no. We can bicker all we want about whether or not he actually did sexually assault children. The truth is, we will never know. The only people who know the truth are Michael Jackson and those who were victims if he did in fact commit the abuse. But the fact is that anyone who actually has been sexually abused, particularly as a child, is likely to side with the victims and be offended by the return of EO.

 

[wizards8507]

I voted no. We can bicker all we want about whether or not he actually did sexually assault children. The truth is, we will never know. The only people who know the truth are Michael Jackson and those who were victims if he did in fact commit the abuse. But the fact is that anyone who actually has been sexually abused, particularly as a child, is likely to side with the victims and be offended by the return of EO.

Even if he never touched a child, isn't the fact that he admitted to having "sleepovers" with them enough? I understand the rule of law and I appreciate that the legal system requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate somone, but to me there are certain behaviors that are acceptable under the law but aren't (or shouldn't be) acceptable to Disney.

 

[Mr. Morrow]

Even if he never touched a child, isn't the fact that he admitted to having "sleepovers" with them enough? I understand the rule of law and I appreciate that the legal system requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate somone, but to me there are certain behaviors that are acceptable under the law but aren't (or shouldn't be) acceptable to Disney.

All Disney cares about in this situation is $$$$$$$ I voted no by the way.

 

[Evil Genius]

Even if he never touched a child, isn't the fact that he admitted to having "sleepovers" with them enough? I understand the rule of law and I appreciate that the legal system requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate somone, but to me there are certain behaviors that are acceptable under the law but aren't (or shouldn't be) acceptable to Disney.

Again, you're playing morality police. We as a society cannot simply heap our morals and ethics on the majority. What is seen as deplorable by some may be seen as harmless by others. Plus there's all those that fall in between.

That fact remains you cannot dictate morality.

 

[Courtney1188]

Even if he never touched a child, isn't the fact that he admitted to having "sleepovers" with them enough? I understand the rule of law and I appreciate that the legal system requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" to incarcerate somone, but to me there are certain behaviors that are acceptable under the law but aren't (or shouldn't be) acceptable to Disney.

I do agree with this, and in all honestly believe that he is guilty and did molest most of the children who came forward. It's shameful that people immediately jump all over the children saying that they are lying and after money. If you've never been through it, you will never understand how difficult it is for a child to tell someone about it when that happens to them. And what does a child care about money? I realize that there have been cases where the child's parents have influenced them to lie, but in all of these cases with MJ? I doubt it. Maybe that's the case with some...but probably not all. Unfortunately we'll never know the truth.

 

[wizards8507]

All Disney cares about in this situation is $$$$$$$.

Certainly. That's my point. I've argued in other threads that "wealth maximization" should be the motivation of firms, but there's a certain point where, IMO, blind pursuit of that goal is irresponsible.

 

[Evil Genius]

I do agree with this, and in all honestly believe that he is guilty and did molest most of the children who came forward. It's shameful that people immediately jump all over the children saying that they are lying and after money. If you've never been through it, you will never understand how difficult it is for a child to tell someone about it when that happens to them. And what does a child care about money? I realize that there have been cases where the child's parents have influenced them to lie, but in all of these cases with MJ? I doubt it. Maybe that's the case with some...but probably not all. Unfortunately we'll never know the truth.

As someone stated in a different thread that I happened to agree with...I have a hard time believing that if the parents truly believed their children had been molested that they would simply accept an out of court settlement, no matter the dollar amount, and allow that to be the end of it. As a parent myself there's no way in hell that would fly with myself or my wife. Which is why I have a hard time with any of the sexual abuse allegations.

 

[the-reason14]

Surprisingly, a part of me would say no. MJ definitely was and still is a very controversial figure. I am happy the show is back though, I never got to see it, and even though I'm not expecting it to be great, I'm glad it's back.

I base my partial decision of MJ in the parks more because of the controversy surrounding him. I understand people's discontent with that aspect. The bigger part of me don't mind as much just because there are quite a few celebrities featured at some of the rides that I'm not a particular fan of, but MJ even though I'm not a huge fan, I like some of his songs.

 

[wizards8507]

Then let's not play morality police and put ourselves in TDO's shoes.

Wouldn't the fact that these conversations are inevitably going on every time EO comes up be enough to pull in the reigns on the project?

 

[Master Yoda]

Then let's not play morality police and put ourselves in TDO's shoes.

Wouldn't the fact that these conversations are inevitably going on every time EO comes up be enough to pull in the reigns on the project?

As long as there is a line at the theater and more importantly the merchandise kiosks TDO could care less.

 

[Evil Genius]

Then let's not play morality police and put ourselves in TDO's shoes.

Wouldn't the fact that these conversations are inevitably going on every time EO comes up be enough to pull in the reigns on the project?

If the numbers attending the show are indication I don't think TDO has anything to worry about. Especially as EO isn't meant to be a permanent fixture.

I'd be curious to learn if WDW or Disneyland have had much of a direct outcry against the film being brought back.

*As an added note...as I type this Jackson's Man in the Mirror just started on the radio.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Someone somewhere will have made a financial calculation factoring the positives response in attendance against those likely to have a negative reaction and pull visits. The results are clearly indicated by the opening of the attraction in two parks.

Luckily we all dont like the same things.