Iger shoots down idea of Dreamfinder return to JII

[peterpanic74]

Maybe. I think that was more of a Rich Ross decision, though.

 

[PhantomX]

Did Iger have a hand in killing another one of Disney's semi-successful animation studio?

>.>

If you are talking about imagemovers. That was a good thing.

There movies have all been terrible. Robert Zemeckis is still involved with Disney though and hopefully that means Roger Rabbit returns sooner rather than later.

 

[DarthGrady]

But it can all be reimagined for a newer audience. Dream Finder can be de-80s-ified to appeal to a new generation of park goers.

Totally agree, they re-imagined Figment (and hopefully will again) and One Little Spark. The same could be done with the Dreamfinder and the entire ride.

Whatever the final product, at least almost everyone agrees that something needs to be done.

 

[wishesjake]

Totally agree, they re-imagined Figment (and hopefully will again) and One Little Spark. The same could be done with the Dreamfinder and the entire ride.

Whatever the final product, at least almost everyone agrees that something needs to be done.

Agreed. It's really a shame that one whole pavillion in future world is just not fun. Imagination is going to be a big part of the future of the human race, and we need some way to represent that whether it be with figmant, dreamfinder or someone else.

 

[Mr Bill]

The Imagination pavillion should serve as an example of the level of imagination found within the Walt Disney Company.

If it's doing that in its current state, we're screwed.

 

[_Scar]

If you are talking about imagemovers. That was a good thing.

There movies have all been terrible. Robert Zemeckis is still involved with Disney though and hopefully that means Roger Rabbit returns sooner rather than later.

Phew... Roger was my main concern.

 

[CDavid]

The Imagination pavillion should serve as an example of the level of imagination found within the Walt Disney Company

Indeed, if we are referring to the executive ranks at least, I think Imagination in its current state is probably an accurate representation of company imagination, at least at the time it was built (the Michael "sole focus on growth and shareholder value" Eisner regime).

Disney today might be better reflected by the wonder that is the new Spaceship Earth descent...

 

[WDWFigment]

Indeed, if we are referring to the executive ranks at least, I think Imagination in its current state is probably an accurate representation of company imagination, at least at the time it was built (the Michael "sole focus on growth and shareholder value" Eisner regime).

Disney today might be better reflected by the wonder that is the new Spaceship Earth descent...

I think there is little dispute that the current version of Imagination turned out poorly, but I definitely don't agree with this being the style of Eisner's regime. Look all over property at things built during the Disney decade: show and quality abounds. You can say a lot of things about Eisner, but I don't think you can criticize his attention to detail (well, you can, but from the opposite perspective--being too concerned with it to the point of unnecessary and often costly micro-management).

 

[Master Gracey 5]

I think there is little dispute that the current version of Imagination turned out poorly, but I definitely don't agree with this being the style of Eisner's regime. Look all over property at things built during the Disney decade: show and quality abounds. You can say a lot of things about Eisner, but I don't think you can criticize his attention to detail (well, you can, but from the opposite perspective--being too concerned with it to the point of unnecessary and often costly micro-management).

I agree - remember that Eisner originally came to his position based on the support of Roy E (ironic that 20 years later he was the driving force to oust Eisner). Those early years under his management saw some of the best work from Disney in movies, the parks and overall entertainment. While we like to blame the current direction on his later practices, you have to remember that the board and shareholders were the ones pushing him to stop spending and take care of their profits instead. Unfortunately that movement spawned Iger and we haven't emerged yet.

 

[misterID]

I agree - remember that Eisner originally came to his position based on the support of Roy E (ironic that 20 years later he was the driving force to oust Eisner). Those early years under his management saw some of the best work from Disney in movies, the parks and overall entertainment. While we like to blame the current direction on his later practices, you have to remember that the board and shareholders were the ones pushing him to stop spending and take care of their profits instead. Unfortunately that movement spawned Iger and we haven't emerged yet.

There is a person who is responsible and rarely gets any credit for all he contributed to that great moment in Disney history... And its not Eisner.

 

[MarkTwain]

There is a person who is responsible and rarely gets any credit for all he contributed to that great moment in Disney history... And its not Eisner.

... Frank Wells?

 

[Master Gracey 5]

There is a person who is responsible and rarely gets any credit for all he contributed to that great moment in Disney history... And its not Eisner.

I assume you mean Roy E. in my reference. He definitely used his weight with the Disney name several times in the company's history and the end effects weren't always pretty. He did some great work for the company, but his mistakes will be forgotten because of his last name.

 

[wserratore1963]

And Eisner once said that Figment would never return. I wouldn't put too much stock into this answer.

Stranger things have happened

 

[tirian]

Not the point, but you are correct.

The fact is this is a film that will do big at the BO and Disney had/has absolutely nothing to do with, but there's Iger taking credit and basking like it was something he had anything to do with.

Of course, there was another reason for showing it at the meeting. Disney is actively trying to strong arm Paramount into taking a payoff so Iron Man 3 will have a castle at the start. There's a lot of backroom lawyering going on ...

What worries me above all is the idea Iger seems to have that distribution is more important than content ... that technology and multiple platforms are more important than a vibrant creative studio.

But this is a trend with Disney ... after all, RFID is all about making you realize how passe the traditional Disney park visit has been ... oops, new tangent.

Yes, I've been keeping up with his studio announcements via Variety, and I'm disappointed in how he's valuing DVD release strategies, video-game tie-ins, and iPhone apps over content.

Isn't it ironic how every CEO since Walt misunderstood what makes the company tick, regardless of their successes? Ron Miller thought Disney was sappy, preschool-friendly fare, then spun the company wildly out of control with dark teenage movies; but he oversaw the Disney Channel, WDW, and EPCOT Center. Eisner reduced Disney to a soulless formula and concentrated on getting bigger instead of focusing on quality, but his mistakes came after the Disney Renaissance and WDW's impressive expansion. Iger purchased Pixar and Marvel, and he's insisting the parks are restored to their 80s-era level of high quality and maintenance; but he himself is more interested in gee-whiz tech like a 1995 teenager instead of the creativity that drives the company.

Why can't the execs understand that "Disney" means the highest, most concentrated level of creativity in the entertainment world, stretching from Mickey Mouse to Cinderella, Davy Crockett to the True-Life Adventures, Disneyland to E.P.C.O.T. [the city]?

Oh yeah. Shareholders.

That said, I think Iger greatly overestimates his talent and abilities. The good thing is I truly don't see him being with the company nearly as long as Michael.

At this point, I doubt he'll be there when Shanghai DL gets done ...

He's done some good things; he just needs to accept that Disney is a creative company and must take risks. The man shot down a sequel to "The Proposal" because the movie can't sell toys and video games!

No, they don't do us favors ... but Disney would so much rather them.

They like the dumb questions ... the poorly thought out ... the people who fumble and stumble and bumble.

You think they want to go back and forth with someone about say ... the monorail safety issue at WDW ... the amount of WDW CMs who can barely afford to eat and shelter themselves based on what they get paid ... or any issue that will showcase just what kind of cutthroat operation TWDC can be?

Nah. Much better to talk Dreamfinder and Song of the South ...

The shareholder meetings are a joke.

 

[FigmentPrincess]

I heard that "speech" the other day. I also slapped my face because he represented the group of people who wish for Dreamfinder's return in a horrible manner.

I would agree with whoever said 80% of Epcot doesn't miss Dreamfinder...but that's also because they never knew what he was. The average tourist doesn't do research, so they are left to absorb what's in front of them. They aren't going to investigate to find out that after an awful refurbishment, the ride was closed soon after for yet another refurbishment. Many probably think that what's there now has always been.

Sadly, probably half of the people that work there don't know what Dreamfinder is, or even that the upstairs was actually ImageWorks..

 

[TheDisneyMagic]

Totally agree with you there, it is sad when I take some one into Epcot for the first time and they experience the attraction. usually a little confused as to why the ride with figment isn't as amazing as I describe how it once was.

 

[_Scar]

There is a person who is responsible and rarely gets any credit for all he contributed to that great moment in Disney history... And its not Eisner.

Mary Poppins?

 

[RSoxNo1]

When I was a teenager, my friend and I went on the original Imagination 14 times in a row. It was always one of my favorite attractions, but I'm not so narrow minded to think that it would have held up if it remained unchanged today.

To me, I don't care if Dreamfinder is in the attraction, I don't care if Figment is in the attraction (especially the current version of Figment). What I want to see is a true test of what Disney Imagineering is capable of. I don't want a mandate from the suits that says something like "you have $10 million, the existing track and space, and the Imagination Institute theme, re-do the ride".

This ride and pavilion needs a new start. As much as I like the building, they could level it and start over for all I care, but the attraction that focuses on Imagination, in what is meant to be one of the most imaginative places in the world, designed by some of the most imaginative minds on the planet should be a signature ride.

I've suggested using the pavilion and ride as a means of showcasing the past, present and future of imagineering successes, and I've also suggested using the trackless ride system as a means of conveying how an imagination can be "set free" but then brought in line. However they do it, I don't want corners cut. To me, this is the biggest black hole in Epcot, and should be the next major thing that is addressed.

 

[misterID]

... Frank Wells?

Yep

 

[disneysroyal411]

If they redid it they should make it sort of mindboggling simple, like the neatest part in the present version to me is the butterfly that appears. Stuff that makes you think in an imaginative way. You know? I hope someone is following me here and I'm not alone in the dark...:lookaroun