Ron Miller legacy ...

[Vince3]

Good or bad ? After watching the CNBC show , I'm not sure what to think. Any opinions or stories on him ?

 

[Vince3]

After doing some research, I think RM should have stayed & ME should have never been hired. RD should have been more active with RM in "righting the ship " instead of looking for a replacement which failed.

 

[donsullivan]

After doing some research, I think RM should have stayed & ME should have never been hired. RD should have been more active with RM in "righting the ship " instead of looking for a replacement which failed.

If you're going to look at the Ron Miller to Michael Eisner transition it's extremely important to understand the entire long arch of the story, and not just the last few years of Eisner's time with Disney when considering this.

There is a fascinating book called Storming the Magic Kingdom that chronicles this time in Disney history rather well. The Disney company was on the brink of collapse and corporate raiders where trying to take it over with the intention of breaking it up and selling off the parks. Some of the most public statements where surrounding the plan to sell off all the undeveloped land and all of the hotels at WDW to rake in the cash from them. It's really a fascinating read focusing much more on the business of Disney and what was happening at that time both inside and outside the company and how close things came to coming apart.

Roy Disney was instrumental in bringing in Eisner but it's important to remember that he came as part of a package that also included Frank Wells. At that time Eisner was the creative one and Wells was the business and finance guy (similar to Walt and Roy). In a lot of ways it was a combination that worked extremely well for the early years. Wells was the one person that could say 'no' to Eisner and it would stick. It was that era that brought about major expansion of WDW, animation like Little Mermaid, the release of Disney classics to home video, etc.. It was truly a very good time in the overall history of Disney.

However, shortly after Frank Wells was killed in a skiing accident in 1994 , Eisner crowned himself king and the negative part of his tenure began. No longer was there anyone around to keep him in check and we all saw what happened.

 

[Vince3]

Thanks Don, for the insight & book rec !

 

[MKCP 1985]

Having lived through the transition years between Walt Disney and Michael Eisner, it was my perception that the Walt Disney film studio floundered for years making movies few people wanted to see, putting the entire company at risk for a hostile takeover which almost happened. None of their movies were ever major box office successes.

Had Michael Eisner or someone of his ilk not taken the reigns when he did, there would not be a Walt Disney Company today.

How would I describe the Ron Miller legacy? To be kind, I would say "he had good intentions and tried to carry on Walt's legacy." :shrug:

It is always very difficult to be the guy who follows "the guy."

 

[216bruce]

Like the previous posts said "It's hard to be the guy following the guy". Ron Miller was only there because he was Walt's son-in-law and had worked his way up through the company somewhat. He really wasn't a motion picture guy or a theme park guy by nature. He did start Touchstone and expanded the company somewhat, but nowhere to the degree that Eisner and Wells did. In fairness to him- the time when the company was suffering was a period of upheaval, mega-mergers and acquisitions in business in this country, largely due to the tone set in Washington with the Reagan presidency. I don't know that it would have been that different business-wise regardless of who was in charge. Even if Walt and Roy O were still around they would have been very old and most likely retired or functioning in a more-or-less figurehead capacity.
The big difference would have been that, leading up to that era, the company may have profited from at least a few more years of Walt and Roy's leadership. With that, they may have been in a stronger position financially due to a better product and not as subject to takeover and breaking-up. In my mind the big hero in this was Roy E who brought in the Bass brothers to financially stabilize the company and green-mail the folks trying to buy up Disney. So, all in all, Miller was a placeholder who in a different time might have done OK. The big problem was a lack of creative boldness that caused the company to stagnate and leave itself open to being bought-up.

 

[Vince3]

216bruce & MKCP1985 , thanks for the additional insight. But didn't Card Walker succeed Walt & Roy ?:shrug: It has been my impression that Miller was groomed by Walker.
MKCP1985, congrats on finishing the marathon !

 

[3IAlienKid]

My opinion is that Miller was the fall guy for everything Card Walker and Don Tatum did wrong in the years between Walt and Eisner. If I remember correctly, Miller was only CEO for something like one or two years before Eisner. Miller seemed to be one of the few in the company that was actually pushing for positive changes, but Walker, Tatum and a lot of other influential people kept up the mantra "what would Walt do?" There's nothing wrong with asking the question, the problem is that many of them answered by only looking to imitate Walt's past accomplishments, rather than be inspired by his looking toward future innovations.

Anyway, Miller himself was the father of the Disney Channel and Touchstone, gave the greenlight for Tron which was the first film to use CG for the majority of its effects, tried to get "Who Framed Roger Rabbitt?" made, produced the very first Disney Broadway show, and tried to get behind a young Tim Burton. But he inherited a leadership team who ultimately dragged him down. When Roy E. let the raiders in, suddenly those same people jumped on the bandwagon and scapegoated Miller for everything negative they themselves had contributed toward.