D
Deleted member 107043
So what's the consensus? Is WDI dead or not?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Is Walt Disney Imagineering dead?
- Thread starter TROR
- Start date
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I think while they certainly have been given terrible projects and budgets to contend with, I think it's also pretty safe to say they sure aren't at the same level they used to be at. But that's probably not all that surprising given that Disney doesn't show much respect or appreciation for them and that's a pretty sure fire way to lose a lot of your top talent that have other options available to them at other companies.
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
In general, definitely not dead.
Many well-executed projects recently completed and a number currently underway attest to that. Can't fault WDI for Frozen in Norway, even though I hate it there... I'd be praising the same thing if they had built it in Fantasyland. Can't fault WDI for not coming up with more original content, because Iger and Chapek see theme parks as a merchandising and marketing tool versus a creative artform.
It's typically the little jobs WDI apparently gives to interns that are the only outright fails (like the Tomorrowland Stage at MK or the new plaza lighting towers at DHS). My major criticism of the big projects is typically that they are mostly well-done, save for x, y, z that they could have easily gotten right.
Shanghai is the case study that puts all current WDI's great strengths and great weaknesses on display.
What I would like to see them re-establish is consistency across projects - large & small - in getting all the little details right and some of the nuance that the Legends and Gen II Masters oozed.
Maybe, one day, there will be a CEO that sees the parks as a greater engine for content creation.
Many well-executed projects recently completed and a number currently underway attest to that. Can't fault WDI for Frozen in Norway, even though I hate it there... I'd be praising the same thing if they had built it in Fantasyland. Can't fault WDI for not coming up with more original content, because Iger and Chapek see theme parks as a merchandising and marketing tool versus a creative artform.
It's typically the little jobs WDI apparently gives to interns that are the only outright fails (like the Tomorrowland Stage at MK or the new plaza lighting towers at DHS). My major criticism of the big projects is typically that they are mostly well-done, save for x, y, z that they could have easily gotten right.
Shanghai is the case study that puts all current WDI's great strengths and great weaknesses on display.
What I would like to see them re-establish is consistency across projects - large & small - in getting all the little details right and some of the nuance that the Legends and Gen II Masters oozed.
Maybe, one day, there will be a CEO that sees the parks as a greater engine for content creation.
D
Deleted member 107043
So in conclusion WDI is not dead, but the WDCo is, at least creatively speaking. Not too surprising given that the company is primarily content distribution focused now.
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't say that either... I quite like the Studios' film output over the last 5+ years (Moana, Lone Ranger, Rogue One, Thor 3, Coco, etc.). The part of the WDCo I can deservedly savage is Parks & Resorts Executive Management and Operations. If the old magic is being killed off (for me), that is where the fault lies.
Other than Tangled, Frozen, and Moana (the tweet joke will age horribly, though), Walt Disney Animation hasn't been delivering home runs imo. I know people love Wreck It Ralph and Big Hero 6 but neither of them feel like Disney films to me. More like Pixar at best and more like Dreamworks throughout. Wreck It Ralph 2 sounds and looks terrible and I don't see how there's even a story for a Frozen sequel.
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
I didn't really care for animation as a kid. These days I'm appreciating it a lot more... Spielberg's Tintin got me into it. However, that Venelope character in wreck-it ralph was pure torture to my ears (as was the king). Those two voice performances could replace water-boarding.
D
Deleted member 107043
Couldn't it be argued that those properties were greenlit primarily to drive content in perpetuity? Certainly each film carried a certain amount of investment risk (well maybe not Rogue One and Thor 3), but they also underscore how Disney prioritizes content over innovation rather than vice versa. Am I being too cynical?
SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
That's exactly why each of them was greenlit. In the case of Rogue one, it paid off. Lone Ranger- not so much.
But if the movie is good, it's good- regardless of the motivation behind it.
Yeah but Rogue One wasn't good. It's so hollow and dull with nothing beneath the surface. It also makes no sense. It's one of the many reasons I'm not going to see Solo.
D
Deleted member 107043
Rogue One is not on trial here.
SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
Personally, I enjoyed it. Especially when compared to TFA or TLJ. It was generally well received by critics and the public- so while every film has it's detractors- I think it was a net gain in terms of world building/merchandise sales/brand strengthening/profit
The Last Jedi is absolute kino and definitely will hold up better over the decades. Rogue One, on the other hand, panders to middle aged men who just want to see things they know.
Rogue One is found guilty for wasting my time and money
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
Rogue one has already been sentenced to death.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I'm sure the movie made money, but all the clearance bins are full of Rogue one junk. So id bet merchandise bombed.
SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
I was under the impression that Rogue One sold well, but TLJ merchandise bombed.
Only the Rose figures haven't been selling from what I've personally seen. Cassian, Jyn, and other Rogue One merch is stocked on the shelves over a year later, though. Nobody's bought it because the characters are so boring.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I have no idea actually. I think it was a terrible mistake though to make one of the most popular, well loved characters in Star Wars history (Luke) a moody jerk in TLJ though. I never cared much for him, but my son wanted to be him and I'm sure many young boys felt the same.
SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
They had Luke cut himself off from the force, Chewie play with the Porgs, only had C3p0 and R2D2 in the background, and put Leia in a coma for a bulk of the film. I think it's safe to say they didn't care what anyone thought of the OT characters. And it's a shame, since they're quality characters that society has grown an attachment to over the last 40 years.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
They are forgetting who the core Star Wars audience is and trying to be something to everyone thereby watering it down and becoming not much to anyone.