Reason the Wand may come down?

[Figment571]

John Lasseter?? Don't think so...

John Lasseter's only 2 virtues...

Animation... (which hasn't got anything to do with Imagineering)
Pocket filling...

As John Lasseter came as part of the Pixar deal...
Why do you think Marty Sklar left... and a whole lot more...

John Lasseter is one hell of an Animator... but only has tiny ideas about Imagineering... <yet another idiot who tries to outsource WDI>
He's still thinking, how tiny Imagineering can be and still maintain a strategic advantage...

NOT

It's still the group that keeps him going... And he's certainly not the driving spirit behind WDI...

I'm sorry. I have talked to Mr. Sklar personally and he seemed to have that sort of impression of him. Though it is all mixed up at the time. It is hard for people to see who is who in this mixed up mess of a situation.

SO I just I am going by what I have heard read and seen from personal experience, so I don't know everything going on. I'm sorry if I said something completely jumbled up and the opposite of what is really happening.

 

[arstogas]

>>>1st.
Marty Sklar didn't need to go, he went voluntarily...<<<

There's more truth to the idea that he saw the handwriting on the wall. Technically he left "voluntarily". Had he not, he would have been shown the door soon enough. That's pretty much not a question.

>>>2nd.
John Lasseter was hired as head of Disney Feature Animation and not Walt Disney Imagineering, and has only one thing on his mind, boosting the PIXAR product... and as the new CEO comes from the same "family", the outcome is clear.<<<

As part of the deal, Lasseter asked for and got Key Creative Executive, including oversight of all Imagineering projects. He wanted that, and he got it.

And as for his sole objective being to boost PIXAR product... you'd know better if you actually were working in the animation industry. That's clearly not his goal. Lasseter has two babies - Walt Disney Feature Animation's legacy, the place that nurtured, spawned (and ultimately spat him out) - a place for which he nonetheless holds great love and a desire (and admonition from Iger, Jobs and Disney's board) to return to greatness, and his personal
baby, PIXAR, where clearly he's got deserved passions.

The moves that have been made in Burbank, layoffs notwithstanding, are making for a stronger, leaner, and revitalized WDFA. So saying Lasseter's singly purposed towards "boosting PIXAR product" is frankly a silly assessment, and doesn't even belong in the domain of educated opinion.

 

[wdwishes2005]

3nd.
The [FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]legacy of Imagineering isn't rooted in logic and economic realities.[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]It's about unbridled inventiveness, and coming up with surprising new ways to have fun. [/FONT][FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The company could use a little of that right now.[/FONT]
"Rebuilding Tomorrowland" never meant transforming into Pixar, unfortunally it all got out of hand and is irreversable.

:sohappy:
Agreed. Nice post Corrus.

 

[pheneix]

$5b for Fox Family would have been steep, if that was the only thing they got. They acquired a bit more in that deal.

Saban Entertainment? The Power Rangers? What a steal!

You wanted Eisner gone, and now you've got the legion of goons who are in control now.

And you seriously want to say that the company is worse off now than it was two years ago? Seriously?

Marty Sklar didn't need to go, he went voluntarily...

Irregardless, Imagineering is better off without him. There is no use for someone who sleeps through meetings.

The legacy of Imagineering isn't rooted in logic and economic realities.
It's about unbridled inventiveness, and coming up with surprising new ways to have fun. The company could use a little of that right now.
"Rebuilding Tomorrowland" never meant transforming into Pixar, unfortunally it all got out of hand and is irreversable.

If what you say is true and Lasseter really does not have that much interest in the department, Imagineering needs to invent a spine. I've talked one on one with a couple of "superstar imagineers" recently, and I know the repressed emotions going through Glendale, but hiding them behind closed doors does nothing.

5th.
For Disney, the frightening thing may be that it's not just Imagineering veterans who long for the good old days, but customers, too... Which is already in development...

A lot of customers have wanted that for a long time. What's new?

 

[imagineer boy]

All I've heard is that Lasseter has been merely a "creative consultant" rather than an authorative figure over the imagineers. The most I've heard him contributing is just some story changes to the nemo subs ride in DL ( which is also horrendously out of place in their Tomorrowland. *sigh* ). But that's it. Mostly he's just over seeing the recent animated films.

The problem with the parks now is that they're being run by people who should be working at Gap stores rather than theme parks. All they see in the parks is an easy way to make loads of money for themselves rather than making the parks a better place to visit. When it comes time to make an attraction, all they'll say is "hey, let's build a ride based off of marketable Monsters inc characters and throw it in that empty timekeeper theater because its cheaper that way. Who cares if its out of place in tomorrowland? It'll bring more people to the parks and we'll make more money. And while you're at it, build it under its proposed budget so we can make even more money." No theme parks should be run like that.

 

[Champion]

Saban Entertainment? The Power Rangers? What a steal!

Rights to postseason baseball, rights to some of the shows aired on Fox Family, etc.

And you seriously want to say that the company is worse off now than it was two years ago? Seriously?

Personally, I like most of the deals that have been done lately, but they are only because of the upswing in tourism. It has nothing to do with the management, because they have been screwing up everything they touch.

I wish I could talk about the one I have intimate knowledge of. The baboons at TWDC wouldn't like it though, and I like my consulting position (which isn't at TWDC before anyone asks.) So I can't. The problems are the same ones Iger had at ABC.

What has been done in the last two years that was well done? And isn't a no brainer?

 

[pheneix]

The baboons at TWDC wouldn't like it though, and I like my consulting position (which isn't at TWDC before anyone asks.) So I can't.

Ah... Good. The consultants that offer their services to WDC are another reason the parks division is making so many dumb moves.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Have you been to Home Depot lately? That can be a budget buster!

Was just at the HD at hwy 6 and 1092 today. Couldnt find a danged cart to save my life. Dont know what they did with them all, but they were few and far between.

Gallon of paint 18.99
Three light bulbs 3.99
Labor to paint and replace light bulbs....$49,984.24,....an hour.:lookaroun

 

[Champion]

Ah... Good. The consultants that offer their services to WDC are another reason the parks division is making so many dumb moves.

Good thing its not for TWDC then. Thanks for the underhanded attempt at a flame though.

 

[Enigma]

You mean the Pixar movies he ALREADY had the rights to? Oh. Ok. He didn't do the deal for those. Those belonged to TWDC. They did the deal for the newer stuff. And we'll see where that goes once we finally get one, which would be the movie after Toy Story 3.

Actually the NEW stuff begins with Ratatouille and Wall-E both movies come out BEFORE Toy Story 3.


Disney's contract with Pixar ended with CARS!

Oh and thanks to arstogas for stating other facts.

 

[mikeb_86]

I like it a long time ago but as the old saying goes all things good come to a end even that epcot wand!!!

 

[Champion]

Actually the NEW stuff begins with Ratatouille and Wall-E both movies come out BEFORE Toy Story 3.

Disney's contract with Pixar ended with CARS!

Oh and thanks to arstogas for stating other facts.

You're right, I wasn't even thinking about those two. However, it doesn't make the argument any less valid. Saying he did the deal to get property he already owned is stupid.

Ratatouille is going to bomb badly. Making a kids movie that they can't pronounce is a terrible idea. Not to mention the whole premise is weak. Wall-E, we'll see when we know more about it. But if you look at the three of them right now, you know which one is going to make the most money. Will we ever see a Ratatouille or Wall-E attraction? Extremely doubtful. I'd love to be pleasantly suprised, but I doubt it will happen, or that either will make as much money as even Cars did.

Buying Pixar was not a bad idea. Overpaid a bit, but thats ok. Just need to make sure that Steve Jobs doesn't start calling ALL the shots.

 

[wdwishes2005]

You're right, I wasn't even thinking about those two. However, it doesn't make the argument any less valid. Saying he did the deal to get property he already owned is stupid.

Ratatouille is going to bomb badly. Making a kids movie that they can't pronounce is a terrible idea. Not to mention the whole premise is weak. Wall-E, we'll see when we know more about it. But if you look at the three of them right now, you know which one is going to make the most money. Will we ever see a Ratatouille or Wall-E attraction? Extremely doubtful. I'd love to be pleasantly suprised, but I doubt it will happen, or that either will make as much money as even Cars did.

Buying Pixar was not a bad idea. Overpaid a bit, but thats ok. Just need to make sure that Steve Jobs doesn't start calling ALL the shots.

Due to the nature of disposable entertainment, you will need to replace the battery in your pass ( an almost impossible feat) once every two years to ensure reliability, thus voiding the warranty. Or you could pay us 100$ to do what some geek could do in about 5 minutes for the price of a 20$ battery.
( anyone with an iSuck will know what I'm talking about here....)

 

[ToTBellHop]

You're right, I wasn't even thinking about those two. However, it doesn't make the argument any less valid. Saying he did the deal to get property he already owned is stupid.

Ratatouille is going to bomb badly. Making a kids movie that they can't pronounce is a terrible idea. Not to mention the whole premise is weak. Wall-E, we'll see when we know more about it. But if you look at the three of them right now, you know which one is going to make the most money. Will we ever see a Ratatouille or Wall-E attraction? Extremely doubtful. I'd love to be pleasantly suprised, but I doubt it will happen, or that either will make as much money as even Cars did.

Buying Pixar was not a bad idea. Overpaid a bit, but thats ok. Just need to make sure that Steve Jobs doesn't start calling ALL the shots.

Rataouille? Bomb? lol. I seriously laughed when I read that. It will make hundreds of millions of dollars and I would bet a lot of money on that. Every audience I have been with when a Ratatouille preview plays have laughed quite a bit. It looks fantastic. Americans are not as ignorant as you are making them out to be, especially when the preview says "Ratatouille" followed by "Rat-a-too-ee." It's absolutely absurd to suggest this movie will not be a blockbuster. People see PIXAR and remember Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Toy Story 2, Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, and Cars, all of which grossed hundreds of millions of dollars. Pixar could make a o flick and people would bring their kids.

And Cars did just fine. $450,000,000 is certainly not Finding Nemo, but it's comparable with Toy Story 2 and still a lot of money.

 

[wdwishes2005]

Rataouille? Bomb? lol. I seriously laughed when I read that. It will make hundreds of millions of dollars and I would bet a lot of money on that. Every audience I have been with when a Ratatouille preview plays have laughed quite a bit. It looks fantastic. Americans are not as ignorant as you are making them out to be, especially when the preview says "Ratatouille" followed by "Rat-a-too-ee." It's absolutely absurd to suggest this movie will not be a blockbuster. People see PIXAR and remember Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Toy Story 2, Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, and Cars, all of which grossed hundreds of millions of dollars. Pixar could make a o flick and people would bring their kids.

And Cars did just fine. $450,000,000 is certainly not Finding Nemo, but it's comparable with Toy Story 2 and still a lot of money.

Agreed.
I disagree with TWDC in that just shoving a pixar character in a ride will NOT gaurantee its success.

 

[mousermerf]

Notes:

They do repaint the wand. Someone said they don't. They do.

I never meant to imply the wand as a structure was going to fall down - no more so then the Living Seas is about to cave in due to its extensive roof damage and leaks during the hurricanes (which it's not.. incase that wasn't clear).

But there has been wear and tear. The electric systems, in particular, seem to not be faring well... and why is SSE so dirty so often lately? Perhaps certain decorative elements aren't aging as well as predicted... (There's a reason mousesurplus has eye-catchers from it for sale every so often.)

 

[ToTBellHop]

Agreed.
I disagree with TWDC in that just shoving a pixar character in a ride will NOT gaurantee its success.

Right...Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor Comedy Club shows this. I wouldn't call it a hated show, but it certainly is not as successful as, say, PhilharMagic. A great attraction is a great attraction. A crappy one is crappy. The argument is probably that having Monsters, Inc. will drive people through the doors the first time, which is true. The problem with that argument is people will come through the doors of a new ride in all cases. Disney needs to recall that what makes attractions successful for more than a few years (i.e. long enough that most guests have already seen the attraction) are experiences unique to the theme parks. That is where the globalization of Disney will end up costing a lot--and these a problems that will be around for awhile, even if lots of higher-ups are fired.

The short-sighted admins need to do some simple math: if a new attraction would be great with a $50,000,000 budget and you cut the budget to $30,000,000 such that the ride is unpopular, goes through months of expensive renovations (add another $10,000,000), and needs to be removed after five or so years instead of lasting 30 years, now a $40,000,000 new ride is required (gotta spend a little more) and now they have spent $80,000,000 on something that could have only cost $50,000,000 if done right, and they've annoyed lots of guests. Of course, most of the current admins won't be around in 5 years, so they don't need to worry about that.......

 

[arstogas]

Re: the Fox Family Channel buy...

Disney actually quietly tested the waters a while back to see if there were any interested buyers for ABC Family... Not a bite. The modest benefits they gained in this sale have not made any significant contribution to the company's bottom line, and this was a huge, huge miscalculation, taking on debt when they could have done it by doing something more proactive with a greater potential for payoff.

In this purchase, Eisner was aping other companies that were buying and merging at the time, attempting to build the company broadcast profile. It was completely unnecessary, and getting rights to B and C cable movie titles doesn't do anything profitable for Disney's library at all.

It's regarded company-wide as a huge mistake. If Iger could unload it, he would, but they'll never get anything remotely close to what they paid in the deal.

By the way, a lot of the "Pixarization" of Disneyland and the other parks, began well before the Pixar acquisition. It wasn't HIS idea to put Nemo or Buzz in Tomorrowland.

 

[beachclubbasics]

I like reason #5...

1st.
Marty Sklar didn't need to go, he went voluntarily...

2nd.
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]John Lasseter was hired as head of Disney Feature Animation and not Walt Disney Imagineering, and has only one thing on his mind, boosting the PIXAR product... and[/FONT] as the new CEO comes from the same "family", the outcome is clear.

3nd.
The [FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]legacy of Imagineering isn't rooted in logic and economic realities.[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]It's about unbridled inventiveness, and coming up with surprising new ways to have fun. [/FONT][FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The company could use a little of that right now.[/FONT]
"Rebuilding Tomorrowland" never meant transforming into Pixar, unfortunally it all got out of hand and is irreversable.

4th
At 100,000 square feet, "theme parks in a box" could be built in 50 to 100 places around the world, planners figured, while there aren't nearly as many attractive places to plunk down the traditional 100-acre theme park.

[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]5th.[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]For Disney, the frightening thing may be that it's not just Imagineering veterans who long for the good old days, but customers, too... Which is already in development...[/FONT]

My kids coment every time we go to WDW that it's just becoming a big advertisment for the movies (of course they love Stitch and don't complain about HIM though...lol). I've been to WDW about 25 times since '71 and the change has not been a good one. I'd like to see stuff come back that is NOT based on Disney movie. Even the older attractions that are based on movies (Snow White, Peter Pan, 20K leagues) were not all "up in your face" like some of the newer stuff.

However, I don't know what's worse, the movie theming everywhere or getting off of a ride and seeing "GE", "RCA" etc plastered EVERYWHERE..lol.

I'd like to see parts of WDW go back to the "World's Fair theme" roots that Walt invisioned.

If they do want to attract more people into the parks though, there is one thing they are going to have to do something about...the price. WDW is pricing itself out of the reah of the average person more and more.

 

[SirNim]

...or getting off of a ride and seeing "GE", "RCA" etc plastered EVERYWHERE..lol.

I'd like to see parts of WDW go back to the "World's Fair theme" roots that Walt invisioned.

Can't have one without the other... :lookaroun