HMF
Well-Known Member
I agree wholeheartedly, especially since backing something up with research and facts seems to be going out of style these days.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Iger rumored to extend his term as CEO
- Thread starter Darth Sidious
- Start date
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Whelp, Iger himself just announced 2019 for the East Coast Star Wars land so no more speculation, there.
That leaves us somewhere under three more years with Launch Bay being the focal point of "New" Star Wars stuff at Hollywood studios.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I would argue that it's a nickpick, but you are right about it being an opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. Perhaps a bigger follow up question is whether it's a "bad thing" or "problem" if something is derivative versus original. I mean, Hollywood as a whole is obsessed with rebooting and adapting works so it's certainly not unique to Disney. And, to Disney's credit, they've overall had some great quality productions (seemingly a better percentage than other studios).
Also, it's worth noting that a ton of stuff has always been adapted. People don't seem to complain when a novel is adapted -- that's really common for films -- and still seem to think that makes something "original" while adopting comics is typically regarded more akin to copying. I'm not sure why exactly, though I suppose that a strong part is because comics are a visual medium in addition to literary.
I'll also add that for the vast majority of people, the definitive Avengers is a lineup that originated with Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Hawkeye and Black Widow and was formed by SHIELD and such. A much smaller number would regard the definite Avengers as one that featured Ant-Man and the Wasp (and was named by the Wasp in fact). Perhaps there's not enough difference for some, but I think that in popularizing the characters for mainstream audiences -- who the heck cared about Guardians of the Galaxy before their movie, even among comic book fans? -- they are doing the same sort of "transformation" that Disney did with the works of Barrie, Milne and Travers. YMMV of course.
Last edited:
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
He said the scheduling conflict was a Board meeting. And he was asked about the council in this CNBC interview today; other related issues as well.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/07/disney-ceo-bob-iger-sits-down-with-cnbc-after-earnings.html
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Most of the insiders here had a consensus of early 2019 for DL and late 2019 for DHS and Iger's announcement seems to support that.
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
Altogether that is a great post, but emphasizing this part. Actually I was thinking about the comic book/ graphic novel aspect of it while writing that post, ie, what makes it different? I don't know how to address that, how it applies differently across different media like theme parks and comics. What I can say is that, a former high school art class acquaintance/friend of mine is now a (well-known) concept artist for Marvel....and I do not consider him to be any less of an artist now, than I did twenty years ago (if that makes sense; I still see those Marvel works as his style).
Last edited:
HMF
Well-Known Member
I wish I could say he was doing the right thing for once but no. It simply conflicted with a board meeting.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Thanks. And just to further my point: there are 9 nominees for the Best Picture Oscar this year...
* 5 based on novels (Arrival, Fences, Hidden Figures, Lion, Moonlight)
* 2 based on a true story of a real person (Hacksaw Ridge, Hidden Figures)
* 3 are original ideas (Hell or High Water, La La Land, Manchester By the Sea)
[Hidden Figures is in two of those categories, since it involves a real person but was a book before becoming a movie]
Have people complained about Fences or Lion or Moonlight not being "original" when discussing their merits? Maybe the source material isn't as well known as Iron Man comic books or the Harry Potter series, but there's always a seemingly double standard of artistic merit when it comes to a more popular product being adapted versus a less well known one. I guess because there's a sense that these Oscar bait movies are being made because "it's a good story" and there's a nominal sense of an artist's vision going into the film while comic books or other pop culture adaptions are just exercises to "make money". And while there's some real validity there as to the motivations of why the films get made, it tends to be very insulting to the filmmakers of those tentpoles who often put just as much heart, soul and effort into their films as people who make prestige films.
Perhaps I've taken this off on this tangent too much, but it's a good discussion. I'll just end this with what James Gunn said when comic book movies were trashed at the Oscars a few years ago:
“Whatever the case, the truth is, popular fare in any medium has always been snubbed by the self-appointed elite. I’ve already won more awards than I ever expected for Guardians. What bothers me slightly is that many people assume because you make big films that you put less love, care, and thought into them then people do who make independent films or who make what are considered more serious Hollywood films.
I’ve made B-movies, independent films, children’s movies, horror films, and gigantic spectacles. I find there are plenty of people everywhere making movies for a buck or to feed their own vanity. And then there are people who do what they do because they love story-telling, they love cinema, and they want to add back to the world some of the same magic they’ve taken from the works of others. In all honesty, I do no find a strikingly different percentage of those with integrity and those without working within any of these fields of film.
If you think people who make superhero movies are dumb, come out and say we’re dumb. But if you, as an independent filmmaker or a ‘serious’ filmmaker, think you put more love into your characters than the Russo Brothers do Captain America, or Joss Whedon does the Hulk, or I do a talking raccoon, you are simply mistaken.”
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Iger also originally claimed Avatar was going to open in 2015.
CJR
Well-Known Member
The good news here is that SWL is actually under construction, and at decent pace from the looks of it. Camp Minnie-Mickey Closed in 2014, Avatar's looking to open in May, so about three years. Lights, Motors, Action closed last year and SWL is looking at 2019, about three years. The numbers add up.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Basic land clearing and prep looks like construction is well underway at a decent pace? Only Toy Story Land has started going vertical. I have my doubts about their speed.The good news here is that SWL is actually under construction, and at decent pace from the looks of it. Camp-Minnie Mickey Closed in 2014, Avatar's looking to open in May, so about three years. Lights, Motors, Action closed last year and SWL is looking at 2019, about three years. The numbers add up.
CJR
Well-Known Member
Well, it hasn't been a year yet since the area was completely cleared out. The Pandora site was pretty flat for a bit too. Once it goes vertical, it should move much more quickly, like Pandora did.
TSL looking further along makes sense, because I believe that's due next year. It should be too, because it's a spinning ride and junior coaster with pretty basic theming. Six Flags puts out similar stuff in an off season, minus the rather easy to do theming.
BubbaQuest
Well-Known Member
I might agree with you, except for one problem. WDW is an overpriced mess right now. I am very excited that Disney is investing in the parks again. I'm sure Avatar and SWL will be huge successes, but I'm not paying $500/night to stand around for a bus that may never come or ride a monorail that smells like . They have already priced me out for their level of service.
I may go back for half a day to check out Avatar, if and only if I can schedule some FPs 6 months in advance, but I have no desire to return to WDW until at least Epcot is overhauled. And that's probably at least 10 years away, and that *is* Iger's problem.
Again, I'm sure Disney will be hugely successful with Avatar and SWL. But for a premium vacation destination, I'm definitely looking elsewhere.
If you haven't been to WDW since 2006, you really need to go back. I went to DHS in 2010 and felt like I was completely ripped off. I can't imagine going anytime near there in the next 4 years.
Great post. And that one of those nominated "original" ideas you've listed has been so widely trashed - and considered by some to be an insult to those great musicals (especially MGM's) of the past - only further validates what Gunn said.
I'm not a big Marvel fan, it's not my IP, but I've enjoyed the movies and I think the Iron Man movies are some of the best in the franchise. Certainly not B movies by any means. And this is coming from a movie fan who dispares that Hollywood ran out of good ideas years ago and seems to only produce bad remakes of quality classics - yeah, Ben Hur, I'm looking at you!
And to further validate Gunn's point, I have three words - Game of Thrones....
I'm happy with the IP purchases. I know my daughter and son in law are ecstatic, being huge Marvel fans.
And I'm just thrilled about Moonlight - what better way to tout the talent coming out of my alma mater's film school than a few Oscars. To add to the trove of student Oscars those kids receive every year.
Late 2019 for SWL. We just might have to do what we'd said we'd never do - drag toddlers to WDW....
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
As to SWL I think I'm going for the pessimistic date of 2021 in Orlando because Iger said there were MORE cuts coming in P&R. They were of course called 'Efficiency Initiatives' and Disney under Iger has gotten nothing done on schedule and on budget
Yes iger made some good acquisitions. Pixar Marvel and Lucasfilm. But the lofty stock price is supported by an outsized share repurchase program not by increasing top line revenues. And while other sports networks are cutting back on rights deals. Iger triples down on most recent NBA deal so on a sports network which is bleeding subscribers profit is crashing Iger goes out and increases the monthly Nut that TWDC needs to make.
Just like Igers NFL deal 2billion plus and NO Super Bowl yet Fox grabbed a better package of games and paid only 800 million. Of course how much of that was a failed bribe to the NFL for an ownership share which he blew by his cringeworthy presentation to the Owners for the franchise move.
On display there was the REAL Bob Iger a glorified accountant way out of his league presenting to real A list talent.
Iger needs to go and quickly
Yes iger made some good acquisitions. Pixar Marvel and Lucasfilm. But the lofty stock price is supported by an outsized share repurchase program not by increasing top line revenues. And while other sports networks are cutting back on rights deals. Iger triples down on most recent NBA deal so on a sports network which is bleeding subscribers profit is crashing Iger goes out and increases the monthly Nut that TWDC needs to make.
Just like Igers NFL deal 2billion plus and NO Super Bowl yet Fox grabbed a better package of games and paid only 800 million. Of course how much of that was a failed bribe to the NFL for an ownership share which he blew by his cringeworthy presentation to the Owners for the franchise move.
On display there was the REAL Bob Iger a glorified accountant way out of his league presenting to real A list talent.
Iger needs to go and quickly
Having just taken a 4-night cruise on the Disney Dream recently, I feel I can now properly respond to DCL items.
Our first DCL cruise was back in Feb 2002, and our second DCL cruise was late last month, so quite a lot of time between cruises and quite different experiences. You pay a premium for DCL, and overall I think there's some justification for some of that premium. The food on-board is good, the cast members are usually top-notch, and entertainment options are decent. The kids clubs were amazing. I even wanted to spend time in Vibe, the 14-17 yr old club, just so I could play 'Guitar Hero Arcade' to my heart's content.
There had to be 100 full-length Disney/Pixar/Marvel movies available on-demand in your room. It seems like a lot of the character/themed experiences on-board are geared for those under 10. The "Pirates In The Caribbean" party was OK for about 10 minutes, which included the time spent watching the fireworks. The theater shows were really good, and unfortunately we had to miss the "Believe!" show the last night because we were busy packing so that our bags would be ready before 10:30pm, and since we had the second dining time, at 8:15pm, it was either see the show and have to deal with all of our luggage ourselves the next day or miss the show and not have to lug 5 suitcases, plus multiple other bags, with us in the morning.However, just as with the theme parks, it seems as though now you have to pay for what used to be included, and there is an up-charge for many things. Want to go watch a movie? No problem. Want popcorn to eat, or even a soda to drink while watching? $$$. Nearly all of the "adult" offerings on board are up-charges, but the kids stuff was all free. The numerous wine/beer/liquor tastings were a minimum of $33/per person, but that was not mentioned anywhere until you tried to book a spot. Want a smoothie? Pay. Ice cream beyond the soft-serve? Pay. A friggin' cupcake (that was days old and dry, by the way)??? You have to pay. We spent $4000 for 2 rooms for a 4-night Bahamian cruise, but another $1000 for all the little fees and "incidentals" while on-board. And that $1000 did not include a single souvenir. I also do not see the point of charging $11 for tube rental at Castaway Cay. You could literally walk into the tube storage area and grab one, the cast members were quite lax about it. Or you could just grab one of the dozens of tubes that ended up strewn about the beaches after noon. Of course, it could be worse - Just to go look around Atlantis runs something like $100-150 per person.
I agree that Disney has been at it's best when there were 2 people running it.
Iger's statement on "de-risking" movies - *sigh*... Just call them what they are now, Bob - Money grabs! "Rogue One"? Money grab. "Finding Dory"? Money grab. Han Solo movies? Money grab. Anything past "Toy Story 3"? Money grab. (And shame on JL for allowing that to happen)
I may need to update this post with other thoughts/corrections/etc., just an FYI.
rael ramone
Well-Known Member
SWL being targeted at 2019 could have a lot to do with ego.....and a lot to do with the 'cabanas' they are wanting to put into the 'experience'.... then again, saying SWL is opening in 2019 in the swamps may be the same as them saying that PUSH isn't going anywhere...
ESPN is the biggest fish in their pond, by far.... and it's been run irresponsibly.
And I'm not convinced that Marvel is the slam dunk that it's widely considered to be... because that purchase came at a price... and that price is now Old Man Ike holding a huge stake in $DIS... His influence in the future could more than nullify the good to the bottom line that purchasing Marvel was to the bottom line... like beautiful mahogany paneling that turns out to have termites...
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
My feeling exactly. Iger flat-out said that they are risk-averse re: creative content development. I see that as a problem because a company that is not willing to take *some* risk, creatively and strategically, will likely not have strong future performance growth (rather, diminishing returns). Wall St is shifting away from acquisition towards more organic growth...in order to do that TWDC needs to develop new capabilities based on their core competencies ie creative content with respect to the studios and parks. It begs the question, if Iger's management culture is conducive to that, for the short-term or long-term. (I'm thinking it's not, but remains to be seen).
CJR
Well-Known Member
It's opening in 2019. There's a lot that goes into it.
1. The construction timetable is right (started in 2016, ready to open in fall of 2019).
2. Now that it's announced for 2019, shareholders will pretty much demand this. SWL is more financially meaningful to DHS than Avatar is to DAK (as you said cabanas, but even more so merch, merch, food, beverages, merch).
3. It'll serve as a promotional engine with Episode IX, out that May (EDIT: wouldn't it be fitting though if IX just got pushed back to a December release).
4. Just to toss it out there, they also don't want TSL to be a dead end for too long. The moment SWL opens, it will take a huge weight off TSL, which will be super crowded with people moving in and out from single entry/exit unless they route people through an opening into the current Pixar Place (EDIT: but even then, they'll still have to go through that bottle neck around OMD).
The excuse to keep Iger around at this point actually could very well be around this. Before it was to see Shanghai through, now, to see Star Wars through. Really, SW, as it is today, is his baby now.
Last edited: