Have Belle and Ariel reached their saturation point?

[MiklCraw4d]

...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!

I think that's a bit of an overstatement at the very least. 'Tarzan' and 'Mulan' were bona fide hits for the studio, and 'Hercules' and 'Brother Bear' were at least modest successes. 'TENG' has become something of a cult hit on home video.

I think that the problem here is that people think what Disney pushes reflects the desires of the consumer. I believe that Disney's influence on the consumer (especially the young consumer) is so great that, to a certain degree they can force demand.

Look at a few years ago, during the darkest of the Pressler years. Mickey & Co. were nowhere to be seen and the company was pushing Pooh as hard as it could. Pooh was on TV, in theaters, in the parks, and being merchandised as hard as possible in every possible venue. Is it any surprise that children suddenly wanted everything Pooh, since that's all they were aware of?

Meanwhile, people like myself who wanted classic characters and park-specific merchandise sat on our wallets because we didn't want Pooh plush. Yet Pooh made up an enormous percentage of merchandise sales; no one pointed out that that was only because it was the only thing they were selling.

Now we're seeing a renaissance of classic Disney characters and to all outward appearances they're selling like hotcakes. Why? Because we have a chance to buy them.

With the Princess stuff, it's big because Disney takes something that works and promotes it to the exclusion of everything else. Sure there are some dogs that simply won't hunt (witness all the bargain-bin Treasure Planet merch), but I still believe that with the proper approach most anything can be successfully promoted given the might of the Disney machine.

Not to mention the fact that diversity of product ensures that there's something for everyone and (to cater to the corporate mindset) you're tapping into everyone's wallets, not just a percentage. As I said before, it's only recently that a diverse enough range of merch is being offered that I've opened up my wallet again.

Diversity is the way to go. I was very, very pleased to see Kingdom Hearts characters, and I thank the Japanese for making Nightmare Before Christmas popular enough for that merch to come around. I would love to see Davy Crockett, Nemo, Zorro, and who knows what else around the Kingdom.

The point of all this is that Disney has 75 years of amazing intellectual property to fall back on. To rely on only a handful of characters from the last decade is a terrible waste. Kids aren't dumb; give them something cool and they'll play along.

 

[AEfx]

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

I don't think it's so much subservience, but the fact that meeting the man of your dreams, a prince, is what will bring you happiness.

This is the great American paradox; on one hand we tell people that you shouldn't let anyone else make you happy, or be responsibile for your happiness, but on the other hand we make that situation into the ideal, i.e. "some day my prince will come" and you will live happily ever after.

To some extent, I believe this is the attraction with the Belle character. Belle isn't looking for the love of her life - she is a "full" person on her own and falls into the situation with the Beast instead of seeking it out. Also, in the B&tB twist, it's the kiss from the "princess" that saves the prince, not vice versa as it is in Sleeping Beauty and Snow White. The metaphor of the man giving his love and approval to "save" the princess is turned on it's head.

It's interesting to hear others talk about Mulan and other more recent Disney characters. The last Disney film I saw in theaters was Hunchback, and I don't think I've seen any on video since then either. Waiting in the queue for the new Stitch attraction last week I had to get a synopsis from other guests as to who he was exactly (I knew he was an alien and liked Elvis music). I like Roseanne so I will make it a point to see Home on the Range sometime, but overall the new films don't seem to draw me in. I keep hearing about a Monsters, Inc. ride, when I'd rather see an Alice or another princess get her due. I don't mind the Princess craze, but I agree with others that the "princes" need love too; it's just that the "classic" princes were rather one-dimensional and except for Aladin there aren't too terribly many male characters to promote.

AEfx

 

[Legacy]

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

Got to love Randy Newman... that's such a great song.

 

[rosebud's mom]

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?

Don't forget - you have to refer to him as RICHARD Van ! :lol: :lol:

 

[rosebud's mom]

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but a few personal details will show how my opinions are formed. I have 4 children, ranging from 25 to 4. My sons are 25 and 22. When they were small, there was a fair range of characters in the parks, with an emphasis on those from the most recent movie. ( Robin Hood, and Rescuers.) The Disney Channel was in its infancy, and Pooh Corner meant you saw 100 Acre Woods characters/merchandise.

My first daughter was born December 1987. Her favorite character was Cinderella. Keep in mind this was before DVDs. We had the vhs that I had purchased years before. Our problem was that at that time, there was virtually NO merchandise available. Mickey, Pooh, and whatever current movie had been taken out of the vaults for video release - that was it. Dvds have spoiled us now. In those days, Disney sat on many movies, planning another theatrical release, and there was no easy access to watch them in your homes.

This daughter, now almost 17, is bitter about the plethora of Princess stuff. She wishes she could be little again, so that she wouldn't be so embarassed to collect her beloved Cinderella things ! Now she searches for Mulan and Mushu, and would kill to see Jack and Sally.

And my youngest is a die-hard Aurora fan. She is EAGERLY awaiting her Aurora's Tea Party. ( Now, of course, she would not have known about this if I hadn't first discovered it. However, I knew how much she would love the experience. ) Conversely, if it were Snow White's Tea Party, my $ 200 would have stayed in my wallet !!

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that everyone will always have a personal favorite. I wish Disney would offer a little of something for everyone. I do agree with those of you who have mentioned the award-winning songs. That keeps the characters/movies in the public's mind.

And, in tribute to the little guy who grew up to be my oldest son, what about Pinnochio ? I can still remember him crying with joy when we found him a Pinnochio plush on his first trip. The boy with the nose is definitely a classic that has virtually no representation.

The Princesses don't bother me personally, especially since my little one is a girl. I would like to see the attention spread around a little more though.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Call me a cynic and at the risk of getting another neg rep point from the boards arch self publicist, I think that it is no coincidence that the movies featured most heavily were made within a certain time window. I mean why should Walt get all the credit he’s sadly no longer with us. Those movies are down to the excellent leadership of the CEO at the time and obviously its only right that he approves attractions based on those movies, if in a round about way it heightens his profile well that’s a sacrifice he’s glad to make. Hes only doing his best to ensure Eisner World remains the brand leader in the amusement park industry, and if he makes a little money along the way who are we to knock him :lookaroun

 

[Mary Poppins]

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.

Yes, but this hasn't even come close to happening. Belle only has two and Ariel only has one attraction dedicated solely to their respective movies (I don't count meet and greet locations as those are simple to change). If they lose their appeal, they simply get rid of that one attraction and replace it with something else. They did this with the Pocahontas show that was at MGM back in '95. The movie wasn't as popular as they originally thought it would be so they replaced the show with Hunchback. For what it's worth, I don't see that happening to either of these any time soon. Voyage of the Little Mermaid has been running for twelve years and Beauty and the Beast for about eleven. If they were going to lose their appeal I imagine it would have happened sooner than now.

 

[VMX888]

well, i believe that belle and ariel are key, because their respective films are among the most successful of Disney classics. All little girls look up to those two because they carry an air of majesty and fantasy as princess-type characters. And for people like myself, they're the type of characters which i had fantasized about falling in love w/, and i continue to look for my princess. what can i say? I'm a romantic to the bone.

 

[speck76]

Yes, but this hasn't even come close to happening. Belle only has two and Ariel only has one attraction dedicated solely to their respective movies (I don't count meet and greet locations as those are simple to change). If they lose their appeal, they simply get rid of that one attraction and replace it with something else. They did this with the Pocahontas show that was at MGM back in '95. The movie wasn't as popular as they originally thought it would be so they replaced the show with Hunchback. For what it's worth, I don't see that happening to either of these any time soon. Voyage of the Little Mermaid has been running for twelve years and Beauty and the Beast for about eleven. If they were going to lose their appeal I imagine it would have happened sooner than now.

But the popularity of both Voyage of the Little Mermaid and the Beauty and the Beast show are not what they once were......

I would think that with the vast film library that WDC has, they could diversify better.....why does the "dancing plates and forks scene" from Be Our guest have to be used in Philharmagic and Fantasmic......I can understand Philharmagic, because they use the song, but couldn't Fantasmic picked another film? Why does Ariel have to be in Stars and Motorcars and Spectromagic.....couldn't another character be used?

 

[AEfx]

But the popularity of both Voyage of the Little Mermaid and the Beauty and the Beast show are not what they once were......

What are you basing that assumption on? I'm sure lines were longer when the shows were new, but I went to WDW earlier this week and spent several days at MGM. It was pretty slow - at one point I got a FP for RnR but didn't need it - I rode three times in a row with no wait, and ToT was at "13" minutes. The park was that slow - and both VotLM and BatB were running to full theaters. They had to go and count seats @ Little Mermaid to make sure there was enough room for my party of two to get in (and they stopped the line at a family of 5), and BatB had nothing but a few scattered single seats available.

Both shows have become an intregal part of the MGM experience for familes and those who appriciate good show. The reason they are popular is because those films were THAT good. The more recent Disney films just don't have the same magic that translates for park guests. I wouldn't wait in line to see songs from Mulan, or Hercules, or even Tarzan (which is why I don't attend that show)...but "Be Our Guest" and "Under the Sea" have become standards.

I know I found myself singing them all the way home, and each time I hear them they sound just as fresh. I think the most magical moments all week were my multiple viewings of Philharmagic, as it's literally the best Disney music ever created in one fantastic show. I'm not a huge fan of Disney films, it's all about the parks to me, but even I appriciate the Disney classic music (new and old) and welcome even more of it in the parks.

AEfx

 

[Mary Poppins]

But the popularity of both Voyage of the Little Mermaid and the Beauty and the Beast show are not what they once were......

I would think that with the vast film library that WDC has, they could diversify better.....why does the "dancing plates and forks scene" from Be Our guest have to be used in Philharmagic and Fantasmic......I can understand Philharmagic, because they use the song, but couldn't Fantasmic picked another film? Why does Ariel have to be in Stars and Motorcars and Spectromagic.....couldn't another character be used?

I don't really understand the problem with this. The song used in Fant! is a moment out of a medley of many Disney songs. It is recognizable from the movie and it is upbeat to fit in with the rest of the songs at that point in the show. Why shouldn't Ariel be in both DSMC and Spectro? They are both parades showcasing different Disney stories and their characters. Why in the world is Mickey Mouse used in so many different areas of the park? Why must Cinderella have her own castle, breakfast, dinner and stage show as well as be in SADCT and Spectro? Why does Pooh and company have to show up at almost every breakfast and dinner across property as well as having their own attraction? I just don't understand. :brick:

 

[speck76]

I don't really understand the problem with this. The song used in Fant! is a moment out of a medley of many Disney songs. It is recognizable from the movie and it is upbeat to fit in with the rest of the songs at that point in the show. Why shouldn't Ariel be in both DSMC and Spectro? They are both parades showcasing different Disney stories and their characters. Why in the world is Mickey Mouse used in so many different areas of the park? Why must Cinderella have her own castle, breakfast, dinner and stage show as well as be in SADCT and Spectro? Why does Pooh and company have to show up at almost every breakfast and dinner across property as well as having their own attraction? I just don't understand. :brick:

I don't understand either......with so many film and characters, why can't others be used?

WDW may use Ariel and Belle because they are the most popular, but maybe they are the most popular because WDC has marketed them so much......

 

[longfamily]

I don't understand either......with so many film and characters, why can't others be used?
WDW may use Ariel and Belle because they are the most popular, but maybe they are the most popular because WDC has marketed them so much......

Exactly
That has been my point this whole time.
Let Disney market one of the other toons like they do Belle/Ariel and opinions will change.

 

[nibblesandbits]

Both shows have become an intregal part of the MGM experience for familes and those who appriciate good show. The reason they are popular is because those films were THAT good. The more recent Disney films just don't have the same magic that translates for park guests. I wouldn't wait in line to see songs from Mulan, or Hercules, or even Tarzan (which is why I don't attend that show)...but "Be Our Guest" and "Under the Sea" have become standards.

I know I found myself singing them all the way home, and each time I hear them they sound just as fresh. I think the most magical moments all week were my multiple viewings of Philharmagic, as it's literally the best Disney music ever created in one fantastic show. I'm not a huge fan of Disney films, it's all about the parks to me, but even I appriciate the Disney classic music (new and old) and welcome even more of it in the parks.

AEfx

That is exactly what I was trying to say...maybe just put a little better. I couldn't agree more that the more recent films just don't have the same magic that translates for park guests. That's why the past films are the ones that they are marketing still. All in all a very well put post! :sohappy:

 

[mrtoad]

Even though they are featured as much as you say, they are not the focal point of all of those you listed. Fantasmic, Cinderella Surprise Celebration, Spectro, Motor Cars, etc. all have many more characters involved. For Ariel there is only 2 things she is the star, Ariel's Grotto and Voyage. For the Grotto it is only because they needed a stationary spot for her meet and greet. For Belle there is only 2 as well, the B&B show and the storytime. The meet and greet in France is only because of location and is no different than any other meet and greet.