Have Belle and Ariel reached their saturation point?

[waltdisny]

I think they should scale back a bit (while they're ahead) just to preserve a bit of the magic. But, then again, there are no brand new classics to constantly replace them. Seriously, even in Wishes, the latest we've got is from 1997. (Another sign that Disney is suffering from lack of story).

How many times can you hear "Under the Sea" in Walt Disney World? Now compare this to the songs from Mulan to now.

Another excellent point by the General. Not many catchy tunes in Atlantis. There is the real reason 2D animation lies dead, no good scripts and no good music to go with them.

Perhaps if someone were to stick a crowbar into the Disney wallet and pry out some cash to use for hiring some of the excellent tallent behind some of Broadway's latest hits, it might turn the corner. Instead they just want to conviene focus groups to figure out why Shrek2 of all things is kicking their rears at the box-office.:hammer:

 

[speck76]

Another excellent point by the General. Not many catchy tunes in Atlantis. There is the real reason 2D animation lies dead, no good scripts and no good music to go with them.

Perhaps if someone were to stick a crowbar into the Disney wallet and pry out some cash to use for hiring some of the excellent tallent behind some of Broadway's latest hits, it might turn the corner. Instead they just want to conviene focus groups to figure out why Shrek2 of all things is kicking their rears at the box-office.:hammer:

Pixar really started the non-musical animated movie trend, and it has not been an issue with their movies incorporating them into the parks.

 

[One Lil Spark]

The Princesses themselves are a multi-Billion dollar line of merchandise for the WDC....that being said, one way to make more money is to drive up demand, and one way to drive up demand is to limit the exposure.

Also, there are more princesses than just Belle and Ariel anyway.....

Plus they're better role models than what young girls are being offered these days. If you'll notice, right as Britney and all those other trashier girls were becoming the idols of young girls the princess marketing line came out. I think this was genius on the part of the WDC. What better way to make revenue than to do capitalize on already existing characters and make little girls emulate them. I'd MUCH rather if I had a daughter be in love with Ariel, Belle, Aurora, Jasmine, or Cinderella than do walk around wanting to dress like Britney Spears.

I never said when I was a young pup that I wanted to be a trashy pop singer when I grew up... I always said I wanted to be a PRINCESS!!

 

[waltdisny]

I think marketing to boys is much more difficult than marketing to girls....

When Disney has tried to market to boys (Atlantis, Dinosaur, and Treasure Planet) they have come up quite short.....Dinosaur was probably the most successful, but it simply takes a subject (Dinosaurs) and adds a Disney touch.....Dinosaurs have been popular with boys forever......this is not anything new.

The Incredibles will probably appeal moreso to boys, as will Cars, but that is all I can really see at this point.

I disagree a bit. Marketing to boys is only difficult if you try to remain PC. Look at the Power Rangers, they've been popular for quite a while now, but they are far from PC when it comes to violence. Watching my son, if you throw in some good action you'll capture his attention for a while, but you need a compelling reason to hold it, such as a strong character and story, or even more action. Even Thomas the Tank Engine, one of the most PC shows with boy appeal, acknowledges this and throws in a runaway train or a good crash into their stories.

I wonder of the emphasis on PC-ness at Disney has been driving this for a long while now?

I'm sure the Incredibles will be a hit with boys, mine can't wait, but again it's not 2D Disney. It's Pixar, like Buzz.

What's Cars? That sounds very promising.

 

[speck76]

I disagree a bit. Marketing to boys is only difficult if you try to remain PC. Look at the Power Rangers, they've been popular for quite a while now, but they are far from PC when it comes to violence. Watching my son, if you throw in some good action you'll capture his attention for a while, but you need a compelling reason to hold it, such as a strong character and story, or even more action. Even Thomas the Tank Engine, one of the most PC shows with boy appeal, acknowledges this and throws in a runaway train or a good crash into their stories.

I wonder of the emphasis on PC-ness at Disney has been driving this for a long while now?

I'm sure the Incredibles will be a hit with boys, mine can't wait, but again it's not 2D Disney. It's Pixar, like Buzz.

What's Cars? That sounds very promising.

Cars is the last Disney-Pixar movie. I guess I kind of lead that last thread hanging....

What I meant to say it is harder for Disney (with their values) to market to boys (although not harder to market to boys in general).

When you see that many parents are buying their 9 year old boys video games like Grand Theft Auto and Vice City......how can Disney compete with that and still withhold its values.

 

[waltdisny]

Pixar really started the non-musical animated movie trend, and it has not been an issue with their movies incorporating them into the parks.

True, but they had fantasticly strong scripts. Didn't they?

Compare Toy Story to Atlantis, for example.

I'm not saying that all animated movies need be musicals. But any movie needs a good script. And if it is a musical, then it needs a good score.

Quick, in less than 5 seconds hum a bar from Hercules. Now, same quiz with Beauty and the Beast.

 

[speck76]

Quick, in less than 5 seconds hum a bar from Hercules. Now, same quiz with Beauty and the Beast.

Thanks to Wishes....I can do both

of course, I only know 1 song from Hercules......all of the from Beauty and the Beast,.

 

[waltdisny]

Cars is the last Disney-Pixar movie. I guess I kind of lead that last thread hanging....

What I meant to say it is harder for Disney (with their values) to market to boys (although not harder to market to boys in general).
....how can Disney compete with that and still withhold its values.

I agree, that's what I am saying. There in lies the rub. Pixar has gotten the knack with Toy Story, Disney seems to have missed it with Atlantis. I think they need to look toward Thomas, and some of their own older stories like Casey Jones, an Pedro the Mailplane for inspiration. If they want to stay with in the box they've built.

On the other hand, I think it may be possible for them to redefine the box and create a new kind of hero. Wayne from Kim Possible and Captain Jack Sparrow might just point the way.

 

[DDuckFan130]

True, but they had fantasticly strong scripts. Didn't they?

Compare Toy Story to Atlantis, for example.

I'm not saying that all animated movies need be musicals. But any movie needs a good script. And if it is a musical, then it needs a good score.

Quick, in less than 5 seconds hum a bar from Hercules. Now, same quiz with Beauty and the Beast.

Seeing as how I love Hercules and have watched it many more times than Beauty and the Beast, I can probably sing a song for you from that film :animwink: .

Anyway, for the person who said why can't we have more girls who are just "girls," what about Lilo and Nani? Disney Magazine even emphasizes how their look is in touch with reality as opposed to Sleeping Beauty and all the skinny princesses :lol:. And except for the whole Stitch storyline, Nani's character can be easily related to I think.

Oh yeah and I agree with it being easier to market to girls. There's more characters for girls to appeal to. I think Buzz Lightyear is probably the most popular character with boys (if you want to count Pixar). Aside from him, hmm how about Hercules? Tarzan? Simba? Unfortunately, the first two were not as popular but oh well :hammer:.

 

[General Grizz]

Pixar really started the non-musical animated movie trend, and it has not been an issue with their movies incorporating them into the parks.

Which is true, but we're actually getting attractions based on each of the Pixar films (or soon will). Multiple attractions, potentially. . . :lookaroun

(Oh. And "Strange Things" in the New Tomorrowland area music loop. )

 

[nibblesandbits]

Stories remain popular because they remain in public view. It is a classic marketing tool. There are many disney heroins to choose from, it is unnecessary to keep using the same two. Mulan, Atlantis, Tarzan, Hercules, and Hunchback all have strong female characters. The draback being only one of these female characters is a princess. Perhaps this is why Disney continues to use Belle and Ariel. The princess theme is important to little girls...but would it be if Disney didn't make such a big deal about it? The point is that too many characters need to be out there instead of Belle and Ariel. They do not need anymore recognition. It would be nice to acknowledge The Emperors New Groove, or Atlantis, even Brother Bear, and the many other stories collecting dust.

While I agree that it would be great for Disney to include these other movies in their parks...how many people (who are not Disney buffs or don't have little kids) can say that they have seen these other movies? The reason movies like "The Emperors New Groove," "Atlantis," "Tarzan," "Mulan," ,"Hercules," and "Brother Bear" just to name a few aren't really seen in the parks is because hardly anybody saw them in the theaters! That's the main point. (Not to sound bad, but I haven't even seen half of them...so what does that tell you) These movies just didn't have the appeal that the movies in the early 90s had. If you ask a random person on the street what recent animated Disney movie they can think of they will most likely answer with TLM or B&B, even Aladin, and The Lion King. You know why...because those were the movies that people couldn't wait to see when they came out. Those were movies that looked interesting and in reality they actually were.

Now when talking about the Princess theme going around...I know that my mind always goes to those characters that are already portrayed. "Mulan, Atlantis, Tarzan, Hercules, and Hunchback all have strong female characters." and I'm sure they do...but these movies just weren't as big as the ones with the Princesses that they market all the time. And that's what counts...So when asked which movies have the more marketable characters? The answer is the movies from the early 90s plus the classics like Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and Snow White. That's just how it is, plain and simple.

 

[TravisMT81]

there is NEVER ENOUGH ARIEL!!!!!!!

 

[Hakunamatata]

On the subject of strong male characters, unfortunatley, Disney does not promote, and no one seems to remember:

1. Nemo - the captian, not the fish.
2. Davy Crockett
3. Uncle Remus - yes I think is a strong moral character.
4. The ________ Van Characters (Mary Poppins/Chitty Chitty Bang Bang)
5. How about Walt himself. What boy wouldnt want to grow up and build his own legacy?

Yes, Disney would probably need to bring back the 20k ride (shucks, darn) but he was a good "dark" character. There was also a movie "The Black Whole", but I cant remember any of the male characters. I believe Ernest Borgnine (sp) was in it. I do remember the evil robot, Maximillion.

Anywho, thats my 2 cents worth on the male character role. Doesnt need to be a cartoon, does it?

 

[Hakunamatata]

there is NEVER ENOUGH ARIEL!!!!!!!

There became too much Arial when she encroached on the 20k lagoon, IMHO.

 

[Figments Friend]

Nora, i totally agree with what you have posted. And it thought is was the only one wondering this question!! LOL!!!!


I don't understand it myself...what is the appeal?? I was never into such "girly" things in my youth...like you Nora i saw Mowgli as a "kid like me" and not as "that boy character"...and i liked that. I usually don't get into the girl charcters in a Disney film unless she's a villianess (the exception being Ariel). I don't know why, they just don't do anything for me and when i was a little girl they still did'nt! But i still enjoyed the movies they were in....

I call it the "Princess Syndrome". Many girls grow up thinking this is what being a girl is all about. It really becomes appartent at marriage, when you get to be "princess for a day" and the like. It's a really big deal to a lot of girls, this whole importance of "Princesses", and i think it has a lot to do with their upbringing.

It can be fun for girls i think, but you have to be careful not to "overdo" it as it can send the wrong message about the female role in society. I still cringe watching film charcters like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty...there whole goal in life in those movies is to serve a man and this is clearly not a good message to be sending to today's generation.

Oh geez...i hope that did'nt sound too heavy!! I've puzzled over the "Princess Syndrome" for ages now. Why does every girl character HAVE to be a Princess anyway?? Take like for example, Pocahontas. Wha?? WHY??? It's because of the conditioning of the publics mentality to accept Princesse' only i guess as stated in another post above. Disney tells us what to like in a marketing sense....so they push it and people buy it.

 

[Hakunamatata]

I still cringe watching film charcters like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty...there whole goal in life in those movies is to serve a man and this is clearly not a good message to be sending to today's generation.

Maybe I need to go back and refresh my memory on these two movies. As I recall, both movies were the stories of women searching for true love, women put in danger by other jealous women, the jealous women getting what they derserved, and the princesses ultimatley living happily ever after.

For the life of me I dont recall the story line revolving around servitude to a male figure.....is it just me or am I a stupid man???? :veryconfu

 

[stitch001]

Beauty and the Beast:
Beauty and the Beast Stage Show @ MGM
Fantasmic @ MGM
Meet & Greet in France @ Epcot
Story time with Belle @ MK
Cinderella's Surprise Celebration @ MK
Mickey's Philharmagic @ MK

The Little Mermaid:
The Voyage of the Little Mermaid @ MGM
Stars in Motorcars @ MGM
Fantasmic @ MGM
Spectromagic @ MK
Mickey's Philharmagic @ MK
Ariel's Grotto @ MK

So looking at this list, there's one thing that is poping out at me, each girl only has one atraction and one or two special meeting areas. other than that they are just one small part of something bigger. In Fantasmic Bell rides by on a boat twice and thats basicly it except for the movie clips, but she's not the focucs, eather is the Little mirmaid, and the motercars is a parade thats ment to showcase charators, and agein micky's Philharmagic, so not the focus of the show, they have one song, isn't it Under the Sea and Be Our Gest. those are both the show-stopers of the movie.
So when you look at it, their just about as much play as others, My dad has a beef ageinst anmial kingdom because he thinks its a whole park devoted to Lion King.
And the fact that alot of girls like these two espicaly is because they were the first to do things that most people thought weren't "Princess" like. Bell was the first to read books. It showed girls that you can be pritty, be a princess, and still be smart. and Little mermaid was the first for the girl to question her life as royalty and show girls that its okay not to be this perfect doll like figure and still be loved. Eric didn't care that she couldn't talk. he still liked her. So I don't think that their being over exposed. but at the same time, there are some that need more attention. Take Meg from Hurcules. I walk in to the local Disney Store and there is nothing of her, theres everyone esle but her. and being a 12 year old boy growing up in the bueaty and the beast/lion king era, she is my personal favorite. And so she was tecnicly evil cuase she worked for Hates in the beging. but Esmerelda wasn't the perfice girl eather and you can still buy your daughter stuff with her face on it.

So what Im saying is, no Little Mermaid, and Beauty and the beast aren't overplayed, but some do need more of the spotlight.

 

[waltdisny]

On the subject of strong male characters, unfortunatley, Disney does not promote, and no one seems to remember:

1. Nemo - the captian, not the fish.
2. Davy Crockett
3. Uncle Remus - yes I think is a strong moral character.
4. The ________ Van Characters (Mary Poppins/Chitty Chitty Bang Bang)
5. How about Walt himself. What boy wouldnt want to grow up and build his own legacy?

Yes, Disney would probably need to bring back the 20k ride (shucks, darn) but he was a good "dark" character. There was also a movie "The Black Whole", but I cant remember any of the male characters. I believe Ernest Borgnine (sp) was in it. I do remember the evil robot, Maximillion.

Anywho, thats my 2 cents worth on the male character role. Doesnt need to be a cartoon, does it?

No not at all. These are all older films you mentioned. None of the recent films had the strong male characters. Walt has always been one of my personal heros.

D. VanDyke also made some other funny but overlooked films, including Lt. Robinson Crusoe, USN.

The Black Hole was a cool movie, but utterly devoid of redeeming characters, save V.I.N.CENT. the know it all robot, voiced by Roddy McDowell. The film was like many 70's disaster films. Everyone in the cast had a set of problems that made them unlikeable, but their petty problems were all swept away by some bigger problem, and in some secret corner of your mind you kind of hoped they'd all get nuked during the story because you didn't really like any of them anyway and the special effects were really cool. But I digress.

What Disney needs is a Kurt Russell (in his Disney years) for the next generation, and a set of compelling stories to tell. Some of Robert Heinlien's books might work well. The Star Beast comes to mind.

 

[longfamily]

While I agree that it would be great for Disney to include these other movies in their parks...how many people (who are not Disney buffs or don't have little kids) can say that they have seen these other movies? The reason movies like "The Emperors New Groove," "Atlantis," "Tarzan," "Mulan," ,"Hercules," and "Brother Bear" just to name a few aren't really seen in the parks is because hardly anybody saw them in the theaters! That's the main point. (Not to sound bad, but I haven't even seen half of them...so what does that tell you) These movies just didn't have the appeal that the movies in the early 90s had. If you ask a random person on the street what recent animated Disney movie they can think of they will most likely answer with TLM or B&B, even Aladin, and The Lion King. You know why...because those were the movies that people couldn't wait to see when they came out. Those were movies that looked interesting and in reality they actually were.

Another successful marketing tool by Disney...out of sight, out of mind.
It may be that you missed a decade of film. With the exception of "Brother Bear" , The above named stories were widely commercialized (during their release)and placed high in audience attendence. These movies had a strong popular interest. Tarzan grossed $448 million, Mulan grossed $304 Million, ENG grossed $89 million (usa/can only),where BB grossed $377 million and Little Mermaid grossed $111 million (usa/can only). These movies have made just as much if not more for Disney than the beloved Belle and Ariel. People forget this because the stories are not represented in the parks or in merchandise.
For the sake of debate, the common person on the street will name Alladin or the Lion King as the most recent movie they can think of because that is the end of the era where all chidren's movies were a disney staple. Today, the average person knows that there are other companies (dreamworks) that make the same genre of films and they don't keep up with which company made what so instead of sounding dumb they name the only Disney movie that they are really sure is a disney product.
The reality is that there is no good reason for not including under-represented stories in the parks. The stories were loved the same, look at the numbers. Maybe Disney mass produced too many Belle and Ariel t-shirts and they have to keep the characters popular until they finally sell out to make their money back. LOL:drevil:

 

[nibblesandbits]

While I agree that it would be great for Disney to include these other movies in their parks...how many people (who are not Disney buffs or don't have little kids) can say that they have seen these other movies? The reason movies like "The Emperors New Groove," "Atlantis," "Tarzan," "Mulan," ,"Hercules," and "Brother Bear" just to name a few aren't really seen in the parks is because hardly anybody saw them in the theaters! That's the main point. (Not to sound bad, but I haven't even seen half of them...so what does that tell you) These movies just didn't have the appeal that the movies in the early 90s had. If you ask a random person on the street what recent animated Disney movie they can think of they will most likely answer with TLM or B&B, even Aladin, and The Lion King. You know why...because those were the movies that people couldn't wait to see when they came out. Those were movies that looked interesting and in reality they actually were.

Another successful marketing tool by Disney...out of sight, out of mind.
It may be that you missed a decade of film. With the exception of "Brother Bear" , The above named stories were widely commercialized (during their release)and placed high in audience attendence. These movies had a strong popular interest. Tarzan grossed $448 million, Mulan grossed $304 Million, ENG grossed $89 million (usa/can only),where BB grossed $377 million and Little Mermaid grossed $111 million (usa/can only). These movies have made just as much if not more for Disney than the beloved Belle and Ariel. People forget this because the stories are not represented in the parks or in merchandise. For the sake of debate, the common person on the street will name Alladin or the Lion King as the most recent movie they can think of because that is the end of the era where all chidren's movies were a disney staple. Today, the average person knows that there are other companies (dreamworks) that make the same genre of films and they don't keep up with which company made what so instead of sounding dumb they name the only Disney movie that they are really sure is a disney product.
The reality is that there is no good reason for not including under-represented stories in the parks. The stories were loved the same, look at the numbers. Maybe Disney mass produced too many Belle and Ariel t-shirts and they have to keep the characters popular until they finally sell out to make their money back. LOL:drevil:

These films that are underrepresented might have been commercialized and they were in that same decade but in my opinion, I think a good portion of the people who went to go see movies like Mulan and Tarzan thought that they would be like The Little Mermaid and Aladian. My opinion on why people don't remember these movies is because they WERE different from the ones that disney coropoation does market. In the movies that are represented in the parks (the later years, not the early ones like Cinderella), they all have a common denominator. Each one of these movies has some sort of hit song. A song that when people hear it, they think of that movie. That is also why I believe that people on the street will name those movies over movies like Atlantis or even Tarzan...because even though Tarzan did have songs, I don't think a lot of people actually remember any of them. That ties into my next point. I also don't believe that just because they aren't represented in the parks in some respect people forget them. Once again, I believe that it's because these movies don't have a hook like the ones that are represented in the parks do. Now merchandising is a whole different story because usually disney will merchandise anything.

(Partial Drift) Also, you said that people only name movies like Aladin or the Lion King because they are unsure if other movies are made by Disney or not...I totally have to disagree with that point. I think if you asked a person on the street the question of who make Shrek or Finding Nemo they would most likely answer Disney b/c there are a lot of ignorant people out there who just don't know any better. True these people don't keep up with the market, but I think a lot of people might not even realize that there even ARE different studios producing them. I don't think a lot of people say Aladin or the Lion King to not sound dumb...I honestly don't think they know of any other Disney movies. They might know that a Disney movie (or another company's) movie has come out...but the movie itself just wasn't memorable to them.

(Back to Topic! ) So in my opinon, that is the reason why the little mermaid and belle are so overrepresented. Because they were memorable.