Rumor Hollywood insiders say there's growing tension at Disney as CEO Bob Chapek chafes at Bob Iger's 'long goodbye'

[el_super]

The park actually looks just like OLC wants it to and its maintained to perfection, OLC is the ONLY company who are buying a full Frozen land, The 1980's are popular overseas. While in Israel I flew El Al and the interior was from the 80's , English language radio stations played music from the 80's, Same was true in eastern europe. People vastly overestimate how popular hip hop is outside of the US,

Oh I didn't mean 1980s as a stylistic choice... I meant in the level of detail and sophistication of the parks. Their Dumbo still looks like a flat ride setup in a carnival midway. The ground is just painted slurry coat everywhere. Those weird design choices like the roof over World Bazaar are still there... still being weird. Tokyo Disneyland feels antiquated. Disney Sea is admittedly a little better, but that park too has changed little in 20 years.

They are getting some new additions which are great and really needed, but that they are leaning so much on IP for inspiration doesn't really indicate a significantly different direction than the US parks.

 

[skypilot2922]

Oh I didn't mean 1980s as a stylistic choice... I meant in the level of detail and sophistication of the parks. Their Dumbo still looks like a flat ride setup in a carnival midway. The ground is just painted slurry coat everywhere. Those weird design choices like the roof over World Bazaar are still there... still being weird. Tokyo Disneyland feels antiquated. Disney Sea is admittedly a little better, but that park too has changed little in 20 years.

They are getting some new additions which are great and really needed, but that they are leaning so much on IP for inspiration doesn't really indicate a significantly different direction than the US parks.

Japan is 'different' it's the land of 'Hello Kitty' and Cuteness is a style all of it's own and most of the rides over there even at DisneySea are based on 1950's and 1960's Disney IP

 

[UNCgolf]

They are getting some new additions which are great and really needed, but that they are leaning so much on IP for inspiration doesn't really indicate a significantly different direction than the US parks.

I think it's the issue people have is that most of what they build is more impressive than what's built in the US. Their new Beauty and the Beast area is so much better than what was built at New Fantasyland that there's not even really a comparison -- it looks better than Galaxy's Edge too, although the attraction doesn't look as good as Rise.

If they're going to be leaning on IP regardless, at least do it right and build something amazing.

 

[skypilot2922]

I think it's the issue people have is that most of what they build is more impressive than what's built in the US. Their new Beauty and the Beast area is so much better than what was built at New Fantasyland that there's not even really a comparison -- it looks better than Galaxy's Edge too, although the attraction doesn't look as good as Rise.

If they're going to be leaning on IP regardless, at least do it right and build something amazing.

Not to mention seasonal parades in addition to the main ones...

 

[tl77]

I think you’re reading it wrong…the people aren’t different, the Disney corporation is…

they are one of the 3 biggest entertainment behemoths now and that gives them “power” and “insulation” to work with. And sadly…they’re right. People threaten…But don’t follow through. Disney is omnipresent now.

it’s the blue ocean theory. They have control and they can mine it out.

it sucks…it’s not gonna end well.

Disney is only one of 3 because all the others lost sight of their company's legacies ...MGM was the biggest in it's day, but as they got bigger they slowly shifted their focus from "making great movies" to "acquiring smaller studios"... sound familiar? Movie studios don't get "too big to fail" they get "to big to function" and then collapse

MGM sold off most of their back catalog of films films to try and stay out of bankruptcy in the 1990's, MGM no longer owns "The Wizard of OZ" anymore, Warner Brothers bought it. Amazon recently bought what's left of MGM and AT&T recently sold off Warner Brothers for a huge loss. These kinds of "creative companies" die if they aren't being run by "creative people

When Walt Disney was alive, the The Walt Disney Company was a fairly small company that focused on "creating characters and films that connected with the public" and RKO distributed their films early on.... so basically Marvel is now what The Walt Disney Company once was

Disney "used to" focus on their core audience, but as the company has expanded it has become more about "quantity" than "quality" and that's a dangerous place for them to be.

It was unthinkable that MGM would sell of "The Wizard of OZ" ...but when you got guys in charge that don't care about anything but making money... the unthinkable becomes the inevitable

 

[Robbiem]

Oh I didn't mean 1980s as a stylistic choice... I meant in the level of detail and sophistication of the parks. Their Dumbo still looks like a flat ride setup in a carnival midway. The ground is just painted slurry coat everywhere. Those weird design choices like the roof over World Bazaar are still there... still being weird. Tokyo Disneyland feels antiquated. Disney Sea is admittedly a little better, but that park too has changed little in 20 years.

They are getting some new additions which are great and really needed, but that they are leaning so much on IP for inspiration doesn't really indicate a significantly different direction than the US parks.

The tokyo parks have some dated parts to be sure. Dumbo, a lot of fantasyland and tomorrowland are very 80s but then so is a lot of Florida. The difference is the tokyo areas are maintained like new not allowed to rot. Most of Japan is the same, you can only date some places by the architecture as its so well kept. They keep what works and what people like and when they replace they do it with quality

Disneysea and the newer areas are miles better than comparable US additions. The cast and guest behaviours are also better IMO. Given the choice I’d visit Tokyo or Hong Kong over the stateside resorts anytime

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney is only one of 3 because all the others lost sight of their company's legacies ...MGM was the biggest in it's day, but as they got bigger they slowly shifted their focus from "making great movies" to "acquiring smaller studios"... sound familiar? Movie studios don't get "too big to fail" they get "to big to function" and then collapse

MGM sold off most of their back catalog of films films to try and stay out of bankruptcy in the 1990's, MGM no longer owns "The Wizard of OZ" anymore, Warner Brothers bought it. Amazon recently bought what's left of MGM and AT&T recently sold off Warner Brothers for a huge loss. These kinds of "creative companies" die if they aren't being run by "creative people

When Walt Disney was alive, the The Walt Disney Company was a fairly small company that focused on "creating characters and films that connected with the public" and RKO distributed their films early on.... so basically Marvel is now what The Walt Disney Company once was

Disney "used to" focus on their core audience, but as the company has expanded it has become more about "quantity" than "quality" and that's a dangerous place for them to be.

It was unthinkable that MGM would sell of "The Wizard of OZ" ...but when you got guys in charge that don't care about anything but making money... the unthinkable becomes the inevitable

It’s a great history lesson…but I’m not sure it’s applicable to Disney and the current state.

I think they are and have been making massive longterm mistakes…

in the parks…at the studios…near across the board.

BUT…they have pretty deep well of sentiment and familiarity to drain. And chappie is gonna drain it. And it will suck.

But the well at Disney is so deep. They bought the single biggest franchise in Hollywood (at the time…and for 40 years prior)…and basically lit it on fire…the DUMBEST angle you could possibly take. Took 5 years flat. And still to this day the defenders won’t admit it…

and that will happen here soon too

 

[rogerrabbitfan9]

Disney is only one of 3 because all the others lost sight of their company's legacies ...MGM was the biggest in it's day, but as they got bigger they slowly shifted their focus from "making great movies" to "acquiring smaller studios"... sound familiar? Movie studios don't get "too big to fail" they get "to big to function" and then collapse

MGM sold off most of their back catalog of films films to try and stay out of bankruptcy in the 1990's, MGM no longer owns "The Wizard of OZ" anymore, Warner Brothers bought it. Amazon recently bought what's left of MGM and AT&T recently sold off Warner Brothers for a huge loss. These kinds of "creative companies" die if they aren't being run by "creative people

When Walt Disney was alive, the The Walt Disney Company was a fairly small company that focused on "creating characters and films that connected with the public" and RKO distributed their films early on.... so basically Marvel is now what The Walt Disney Company once was

Disney "used to" focus on their core audience, but as the company has expanded it has become more about "quantity" than "quality" and that's a dangerous place for them to be.

It was unthinkable that MGM would sell of "The Wizard of OZ" ...but when you got guys in charge that don't care about anything but making money... the unthinkable becomes the inevitable

“MGM failed because it got too busy making acquisitions” may be partially correct but is missing some context that is very important in understanding the situation Disney currently finds themselves in.

MGMs hayday ended in 1959, due to the invention of television and an anti trust decision that forced the major studios of the time to drastically change how they contracted with theatres. In the hay day, for a theatre to get access to a flag pole film, they would also have to agree to purchase a bunch of b level films from the studio. The antitrust decision banned that, which made producing the b level movies unprofitable and caused studios to produce fewer higher risk films. At the same time television was becoming more and more popular, competing with theatres for people’s attention.

MGM didn’t adapt well to the new landscape and suffered.

We’ve been living through a similar amount of technological upheaval today. Instead of an antitrust decision changing the business model, you have tech companies who want to insert themselves in every transaction with a customer. Instead of television, you have the internet and social media, which has changed how people get, learn about, talk about, and interact with content.

For all of his faults, Iger seems to have understood exactly where things were going and instead of failing to adapt, took a fairly big risk with Disney+, specifically to not wind up like MGM.

 

[skypilot2922]

It’s a great history lesson…but I’m not sure it’s applicable to Disney and the current state.

I think they are and have been making massive longterm mistakes…

in the parks…at the studios…near across the board.

BUT…they have pretty deep well of sentiment and familiarity to drain. And chappie is gonna drain it. And it will suck.

But the well at Disney is so deep. They bought the single biggest franchise in Hollywood (at the time…and for 40 years prior)…and basically lit it on fire…the DUMBEST angle you could possibly take. Took 5 years flat. And still to this day the defenders won’t admit it…

and that will happen here soon too

It's unimaginable but Disney basically killed Star Wars in 5 years, They can't even GIVE the merchandise away its that dead.

I don't think the well is as deep at Disney as people think, remember they basically blew all their cash on share repurchases they have a huge nut to cover with Fox and ESPN Disney's other ATM is losing subs and a lot of expensive broadcast rights contracts are coming up for bid. And Amazon, Apple and Google have ready cash, Disney does not.


In my opinion Disney made a huge strategic mistake with D+, They own 2/3 of Hulu therefore they are the big dog in the lead there, Disney should have made Hulu the signature platform for Disney content as Hulu was already profitable and the investment from Disney would have prepared it to scale to the next level.

Now Disney has an 'also ran' platform with lots of subscribers but little content

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's unimaginable but Disney basically killed Star Wars in 5 years, They can't even GIVE the merchandise away its that dead.

I wouldn’t go that far…

they tried to kill it…and did substantial merchandise damage with it…but have done decent damage control since by letting others take over the direction.

its still a work in progress as they finally build the bridge back to the start…which they seem to finally be resigned to accept.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Disney is only one of 3 because all the others lost sight of their company's legacies ...MGM was the biggest in it's day, but as they got bigger they slowly shifted their focus from "making great movies" to "acquiring smaller studios"... sound familiar?

This is not true. MGM failed to prepare itself for a post Paramount Decision/Television future and became marginalized. Kirk Kerkorian was able to acquire the studio and kind of ran it into the ground and it became a plaything for moguls, Kerkorian and Turner, and investment banks for decades.

 

[skypilot2922]

I wouldn’t go that far…

they tried to kill it…and did substantial merchandise damage with it…but have done decent damage control since by letting others take over the direction.

its still a work in progress as they finally build the bridge back to the start…which they seem to finally be resigned to accept.

As far as the general public are concerned its dead and buried - the Star Wars universe novels like the Thrawn Trilogy are better than anything Disney ever dreamed of. The only people who care about Star Wars anymore are people who are hard core fans who belong to the 501st legion like some of my friends do, i usually give them crap about the wrong side won the rebellion.

 

[UNCgolf]

As far as the general public are concerned its dead and buried - the Star Wars universe novels like the Thrawn Trilogy are better than anything Disney ever dreamed of. The only people who care about Star Wars anymore are people who are hard core fans who belong to the 501st legion like some of my friends do, i usually give them crap about the wrong side won the rebellion.

Most of the old Star Wars novels were trash too, although the original Thrawn trilogy was pretty good and definitely better than the recent sequel trilogy. It's still probably the best follow up to the OT across all forms of media. However, it had several plot points that were already wiped out by the prequels.

 

[spock8113]

Bob Iger is doing what my Grandmother called "Oozing out the door."

 

[brb1006]

When he got visibly giddy and fangirlish at the last D23 Expo over sharing the stage with the Target CEO, after seeming fake and painfully reading his TelePrompTer when he had to talk about all the amusement park stuff before he got to the big Target news, the curtain dropped away from his facade.

He's a farce. And clueless about parks and movies. And a real stiff to be around. Sometimes even douchey, which is odd considering his humble Indiana background and genuinely nice extended family. Or so I've heard.

The real star of the last D23 is the Target Dog!

 

[skypilot2922]

The real star of the last D23 is the Target Dog!

And that friends sums up the entire Disney strategy, Merchandise the heck out of Disney branded cheaply made clothing, toys and housewares through a big box discounter, The WalMart'ing of Disney is now complete

 

[Sir_Cliff]

For all of his faults, Iger seems to have understood exactly where things were going and instead of failing to adapt, took a fairly big risk with Disney+, specifically to not wind up like MGM.

I have a feeling people will hotly contest this, but my impression is that Iger was actually quite well attuned to developments in the entertainment industry and able to adapt effectively. That was something Disney had a lot of trouble with in the last decade or so of Eisner. The whole Go.com adaptation to the rise of the internet was a flop that seems to march on in zombie fashion within the company, and Disney was even slow and bad at adapting to the advent of DVDs. I'll always remember Eisner talking about deciding Disney needed to get into DVDs when he walked into a store and saw shelves and shelves of them.

The picture as far as the streaming revolution goes, however, is that Disney+ immediately became one of the big players. Whatever the backlash, at least Disney isn't dithering in trying to figure out how to deal with a world in which there will be less movie theatres and more home streaming. Again, it took them longer to accept that DVDs were a thing!

 

[skypilot2922]

I have a feeling people will hotly contest this, but my impression is that Iger was actually quite well attuned to developments in the entertainment industry and able to adapt effectively. That was something Disney had a lot of trouble with in the last decade or so of Eisner. The whole Go.com adaptation to the rise of the internet was a flop, and Disney was even slow and bad at adapting to the advent of DVDs.

The picture as far as the streaming revolution goes, however, is that Disney+ immediately became one of the big players. Whatever the backlash, at least Disney isn't dithering in trying to figure out how to deal with a world in which there will be less movie theatres and more home streaming. Again, it took them longer to accept that DVDs were a thing!

Yes the biggest player on sheer number of subs, yet having the least compelling catalog of all the players out there. A black hole for money.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Don’t think this scarjo lawsuit is gonna ease the Bob’s tension levels

 

[dsinclair]

MGM sold off most of their back catalog of films films to try and stay out of bankruptcy in the 1990's, MGM no longer owns "The Wizard of OZ" anymore, Warner Brothers bought it. Amazon recently bought what's left of MGM and AT&T recently sold off Warner Brothers for a huge loss. These kinds of "creative companies" die if they aren't being run by "creative people

This is incorrect. Ted Turner bought MGM in the 80's from Kirk Kerkorian, but after only owning MGM for a few months Turner basically reversed the MGM sale back to Kerkorian, but retained ownership of all film properties in a newly formed subsidiary called Turner Entertainment Company.

Turner Entertainment Company then became part of Warner Brothers in the mid 90's when WB purchased all of Turner Broadcasting.