Have Belle and Ariel reached their saturation point?

[speck76]

With the vast library of films that the WDC has created over the years, they would seem to have an endless supply of characters to choose from when creating new experiences for the guests. It seems to me that both Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid have an inproportionate number of attractions either devoted to them, or that feature them.

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

Now, I think both of the movies were great, and were instant classics, but will the point come to be that there is too much of these movies represented in the parks?

 

[stitchcastle]

I think the reason that there are so much representations of both The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast is because these are the films that a lot of people remember and relate to more. They are alos the more recent "fairy tale" hits that Disney has created and is greatly familiar with.

With the consumers today, more people remember the movies of Ariel and Belle than they do Snow White and Cinderella partially because The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast were what kick-started the notion of having Disney classics with a contemporary appeal.

 

[Slipknot]

I don't think that there are too many attractions that feature B+B and LM. There are just a ton of people who love them!!!!! What youngster wouldn't want to meet Belle, Ariel, Beast and the others in person??

 

[speck76]

I think the reason that there are so much representations of both The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast is because these are the films that a lot of people remember and relate to more. They are alos the more recent "fairy tale" hits that Disney has created and is greatly familiar with.

With the consumers today, more people remember the movies of Ariel and Belle than they do Snow White and Cinderella partially because The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast were what kick-started the notion of having Disney classics with a contemporary appeal.

Yeah, they are more recent, but I would bet as many kids have seen Cinderella as have The Little Mermaid....and yes, TLM may appeal more to the kids these days, but how much is too much? How much can WDW invest into these 2 films before the characters get overexposed, and potentially lose favor with the public? And if the characters lose favor with the public, and an inproportionate number of attractions feature these characters, that seems like the whole "putting all of your eggs in 1 basket" issue, which could become messy down the road.

 

[tigsmom]

As the mother of girls I can tell you that you can't get enough of them.
These are the movies that today's teen & preteen girls identify with...strong female role models (along with Mulan & Meg from Hercules). These were the first films they were introduced to and they have become favorites...today's classics. :wave:

 

[stitchcastle]

Yeah, they are more recent, but I would bet as many kids have seen Cinderella as have The Little Mermaid....and yes, TLM may appeal more to the kids these days, but how much is too much? How much can WDW invest into these 2 films before the characters get overexposed, and potentially lose favor with the public? And if the characters lose favor with the public, and an inproportionate number of attractions feature these characters, that seems like the whole "putting all of your eggs in 1 basket" issue, which could become messy down the road

well to even things out there are NO major attractions devoted to these 2 movies anyway and when you talk about over-exposure then maybe you should add in Mickey and friends to the mix.

And yes children may have also seen Cinderella and Snow White etc. but kids tend to have more fun with B&B and TLM. A good reason to this is that the 2 more recent movies have the edge that they are more of "musicals" than any of the other classics

 

[One Lil Spark]

How much can WDW invest into these 2 films before the characters get overexposed, and potentially lose favor with the public? And if the characters lose favor with the public, and an inproportionate number of attractions feature these characters, that seems like the whole "putting all of your eggs in 1 basket" issue, which could become messy down the road.

Do you have any examples of this happening with other characters in the past? I can't really think of any, but I could be wrong.

(By the way, nice to see ya!! :wave: )

 

[stitchcastle]

Do you have any examples of this happening with other characters in the past? I can't really think of any, but I could be wrong.

Should Pokemon count?

 

[Atta83]

Should Pokemon count?

:hurl: :hurl: I cant stand Pokemon...i dont think though you can compare that to disney characters.

 

[speck76]

I think Mickey Mouse is different than any of the movie characters.....I don't know why, but I think he and the "classic" characters are different.

I don't know if the over-exposure has happened in the past, but I think my main point is a point will come where enough is enough, when they could potentially over-expose the characters, and turn people off of them.

My biggest concern is when the characters lose their appeal.....it happens to everything (remember how big Cabbage Patch Kids were in the 80's, you could not find them anywhere, but 3 years later, stores could not give them away.....Beanie Babies too) if the parks are too invested in a small base of characters, the parks could have some issues.

Let's say the MK has 50 attractions, and 10 feature Belle.......if Belle loses favor with the vistors, then 20% of the Disney attractions have potentially lost their appeal. If only 2 or 3 attractions featured Belle, and the other 7 or 8 drew upon the vast number of other characters the Disney has created, the potential risk is much less.

 

[speck76]

Oh, and another thing I just thought of:

Does making the characters so common throughout the parks potentially lessen their value? If you can see Belle around each and every corner, does it become not so special?

Whereas (and this is not the greatest example) Splash Mountain's characters from the Song of the South are only found at the MK on any regular basis, and only on or around the ride. Would treating the more current films this way increase the demand for these characters.....if the only place you could see Ariel was in her grotto and at The Voyage of the Little Mermaid show, then demand would be greater for these attractions, but as you can see her in many locations, is that lessening the demand for each attraction?

 

[One Lil Spark]

But Disney is the greatest marketing mastermind of our time.

Won't we still "love" a character as long as they tell us and let us love them? Take for instance the oldie characters like the Gummi Bears. They are disney characters and were beloved in the 80s (especially by yours truly) but they've dropped off the radar screen of pop culture. Even Darwing Duck and Rescue Rangerss still get a little blip on the radar but only b/c Disney tells us they're still around. They're being viewed on toon disney and magically they're back in the parks b/c they're making disney money again. It's all in what they want to show us and shove down our throats per se.

As long as they want Ariel to be popular, she will be! That's why they're billionaires and we're lowly blue collar employees spending our hard earned money on them. :hammer:

 

[longfamily]

I addressed this same debate on another thread concerning the implementation of a BB or LM dark ride. I have to agree with speck that it doesn't make any sense to continue to use these characters over and over again when there are many other stories that Disney has and has not used. The Black Cauldron is a perfect example of a storyline that has not been utilized. Although the story is dated now, it would not take much publicity to bring it back. A perfect example of stories forgotten and brought back to life is Song of the South. 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.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

While they are seen quite alot at WDW I disagree with your opinion. These attractions are small ones. If they had a proper attraction to be seen in I'd probably think very much like you but these ones are very small and far from incredible or unforgetable..

Just my opinion...

 

[Nora]

I think that the princesses have been generally overemphasized in the past few years. Speaking as a girl who grew up in the era of films like the Jungle Book and the Rescuers, why do we have to encourage our daughters to emulate princesses? As a girl I wasn't really aware of the gender difference between Mowgli and myself. I just thought he was an interesting character in a good movie. I recognize that the new school princesses are better role models in the sense that they are more active participants in their stories (compared with Snow White or Sleeping Beauty,) but why so many princesses in general? Why not more characters who are just girls?

 

[Atta83]

Why not more characters who are just girls?

Well you have Jane Porter and she was not very popular. THen you have the girl from the Black Cauldran (cant think of the name)other shows like that. The princesses is hwat little girls dream of being and almost every little girl i know has been called a princess by her father so that appeals to them more. I think Jim Hawkins and B.E.N could of been more , but the movie flopped which did not help them in any way shape or form.

 

[speck76]

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.....

 

[General Grizz]

With the vast library of films that the WDC has created over the years, they would seem to have an endless supply of characters to choose from when creating new experiences for the guests. It seems to me that both Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid have an inproportionate number of attractions either devoted to them, or that feature them.

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

Now, I think both of the movies were great, and were instant classics, but will the point come to be that there is too much of these movies represented in the parks?

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.

 

[waltdisny]

I think that the princesses have been generally overemphasized in the past few years. .....I recognize that the new school princesses are better role models in the sense that they are more active participants in their stories (compared with Snow White or Sleeping Beauty,) but why so many princesses in general? Why not more characters who are just girls?

Good question.
Also, I've noticed that Disney takes some pretty fair liberties with who gets to be a princess and who doesn't. Belle, for example, is a commoner and she gets included on all of the merchandise; yet Mulan, who is at least noble by birth, often gets left off. And poor Meg is no where at all. It puts me in mind of the Constitutional Peasant skit from Python.

Taking it one step more, It's always seemed to me that Disney hasn't done much to appeal to boys lately. Buzz and Woody being the exception for the last few years. There just doesn't seem to be an equivolent group of strong male figures, unless you count the villians.

Not that I'm knocking the princesses, my girls love them, and so do I. But it would be nice for my son to have a character he could identify with.

 

[speck76]

Good question.
Also, I've noticed that Disney takes some pretty fair liberties with who gets to be a princess and who doesn't. Belle, for example, is a commoner and she gets included on all of the merchandise; yet Mulan, who is at least noble by birth, often gets left off. And poor Meg is no where at all. It puts me in mind of the Constitutional Peasant skit from Python.

Taking it one step more, It's always seemed to me that Disney hasn't done much to appeal to boys lately. Buzz and Woody being the exception for the last few years. There just doesn't seem to be an equivolent group of strong male figures, unless you count the villians.

Not that I'm knocking the princesses, my girls love them, and so do I. But it would be nice for my son to have a character he could identify with.

I think marketing to boys is much more difficult than marketing to girls. Most little girls go through that "dainty" (often pushed on them by their parents) so Disney has a great opportunity to use existing characters to grab their attention. (For instance, how many kids really want to do the $200 Princess Tea at the GF???.......this is a parents snob-appeal deal)

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.

Stitch is a character that appeals to both boys and girls, but how far can 1 character be taken until it too become over-exposed?

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