Spirited News & Observations II -- NGE/Baxter

[awoogala]

Nope, that's Mila.

too bad.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Yes. ... Depp created an iconic character in Captain Jack Sparrow.

I wouldn't call him an iconic actor, though. But I have liked or loved almost every film he has ever been in. It's nice to see a local guy and high school drop out make good.

Since he started the Pirates of the Caribbean movie, I haven't liked Depp in any role other than Jack Sparrow. I'm cautiously optimistic about Tonto/The Lone Ranger.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Nope, that's Mila.

Wow, I just looked at more images and see that it's Mila - that really looks like Rachel Weisz to me though.

 

[bubbles1812]

That's Rachel Weisz

It's Mila. Look at the trailer and she's wearing that outfit. That being said, I understand the confusion. As I already said earlier... Bad bad baaaaaaaad photoshop.

Also... I would love to see something from How To Train Your Dragon in the Universal Parks. I couldn't believe how much I loved that movie and my family was greatly amused when I asked for it for Christmas. That soundtrack on it is just plain beautiful. @WDW1974 you know something! Spill it!

 

[Lee]

Jay "I F#^&@(% hate quality"

Bob Weis looks like he's thinking, "Yeah, he's gonna touch it and its gonna break and I'm gonna look bad. Can I go now?"

 

[Californian Elitist]

Wow, I just looked at more images and see that it's Mila - that really looks like Rachel Weisz to me though.

Definitely understandable, the photoshop process is seriously bad. She doesn't even look the same.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Yikes. I didn't know it had cost that much. But yeah, assuming say 100 million spent on advertising, it's a tall hill. But again, it's really tracking that bad? Sorry just trying to clarify your answer, I get with the production and advertising it's costly. But films have been costly before and done well. When you said "it's still early but it's not looking good" were you referring to the tracking on the film or just referring more to how it's a high hill to climb for profitability?

I still think this will be a bankable film, but it all depends on foreign markets. I just skimmed Les Mis' foreign box office totals (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=lesmiserables2012.htm)
S. Korea: $38,600,660
Japan:$48,156,304

What I find so fascinating about the March tent pole spot Disney has in its schedule is that it's assumed to be a "sure thing", but that hasn't been the case. It started with Alice in Wonderland in 2010 which was coming off of Avatar and the 3D craze and made a billion worldwide. I still think that was a fluke. John Carter, for various reasons, did poorly. Oz and Maleficent are cut from the same cloth.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Then there's this.

 

[WDW1974]

''Price leverage'' ... did you catch the words flowing forth from the Weatherman's lips today?

That's not the same as something like ''we believe our product provides an excellent value for our Guests and our feedback and research tell us the same'' AKA as the typical Disney answer regarding pricing.

What Bob was suggesting is something different ... and in light of what I posted in bedtime banter, one might wonder if there was a glimpse of the future slipping off the CEO's tongue.

You guys need to focus on these things!

 

[WDW1974]

So @WDW1974 (Mr.Spirit) or @Lee, could one of the factors for Burbank/WDI pushing for Mr.Tony Baxter to leave is simply because he wanted to create another blue ocean(like a one of a kind E-Ticket attraction/land) while the others were simply focusing on strengthening their own internal blue ocean strategy like NGE? Could this possibly be the reason Mr.Baxter finally said enough is enough with WDI simply because his vision/viewpoint/definition of a company being a "blue ocean" innovator (which is the right path) is different than what Iger and the rest of his corporate pawsy/puppetheads define as a "blue ocean" strategy? Now would be a good time for Baxter to write that after life Disney book.

Without getting into too much BOS (because, frankly, I'm no economist) ... but suffice to say Tony's view for what Disney Parks should be is diametrically opposite to how they are seen by Jay Rasulo and Tom Staggs and Bruce Vaughn etc ...

 

[WDW1974]

while I hate to be the one with the bad news, I LOVE your post!!!

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Do you have any good news?

 

[WDW1974]

He also said nothing else is in construction at WDW right now, and then later in the article references the D-ticket Mine Train ride.

Apparently, he has bought into that as well.

This ride is no 'D' Ticket, but haven't we had that discussion about 76,432 times already?

What I took from Al talking about the lukewarm (at best) response to 'New Fantasyland' beyond the eating hall was that he said that was the reason why the Iron Man attraction for DL had been tabled temporarily because they were looking at the whole land based on the WDW piecemeal approach.

I have been critical of Al of late, mostly for presenting information that I've placed here as news he was breaking on Miceage.com, but I think much of his column today was quite accurate. ... Descriptions on future WDW kiddie coasters aside.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

What I took from Al talking about the lukewarm (at best) response to 'New Fantasyland' beyond the eating hall was that he said that was the reason why the Iron Man attraction for DL had been tabled temporarily because they were looking at the whole land based on the WDW piecemeal approach.

I am glad that they're looking at redoing the entire land since it's such a hodgepodge. Too bad they laid off one of their most talented designers.

You reap what you sow...

 

[WDW1974]

Yikes. I didn't know it had cost that much. But yeah, assuming say 100 million spent on advertising, it's a tall hill. But again, it's really tracking that bad? Sorry just trying to clarify your answer. I get with the production and advertising it's costly. But films have been costly before and done well. When you said "it's still early but it's not looking good" were you referring to the tracking on the film or just referring more to how it's a high hill to climb for profitability?

Today, films have to make ridiculous sums of money to just break even.

It wasn't all that long ago where $100 million was a blockbuster. Then, it was $200 million. Now, you can have a film make over $300 million and still be in the red due to costs of everything from talent to production to marketing.

Oz, Lone Ranger, Iron Man 3 and Monsters U have costs in the neighborhood of a billion dollars between the four, well over when you add marketing. Do you know what that means when it comes to BO?

 

[Clever Name]

Oz, Lone Ranger, Iron Man 3 and Monsters U have costs in the neighborhood of a billion dollars between the four, well over when you add marketing. Do you know what that means when it comes to BO?

I just hope that Tonto knows how to swim.

 

[WDW1974]

Since he started the Pirates of the Caribbean movie, I haven't liked Depp in any role other than Jack Sparrow. I'm cautiously optimistic about Tonto/The Lone Ranger.

Honestly, out of the big four films Disney is releasing that is the one that has my attention. I am so hoping it can revive westerns (or family westerns) the way PoC did for pirate films.

But I have enjoyed Depp in other films of late ... I thought he was wonderful in both Alice in Woderland and Dark Shadows. ... And I almost fell asleep when I went to see PoC 4.

 

[bubbles1812]

Today, films have to make ridiculous sums of money to just break even.

It wasn't all that long ago where $100 million was a blockbuster. Then, it was $200 million. Now, you can have a film make over $300 million and still be in the red due to costs of everything from talent to production to marketing.

Oz, Lone Ranger, Iron Man 3 and Monsters U have costs in the neighborhood of a billion dollars between the four, well over when you add marketing. Do you know what that means when it comes to BO?

you have to make a billion+1

Sorry just teasin ya

 

[WDW1974]

I am one who called for a return to ticket books over the years, I'll admit it.

And I'm not certain that a pricing structure to the parks is a bad idea. Hopefully this doesn't mark me as an elitist, but hear me out.

I somehow skipped over this (a few posts actually ... so, no, you can't multi-task when posting apparently!)
I do recall you saying this more than once, Kev. I sorta agree with your logic, but not your conclusion, but maybe you'll change my mind.

I'll also remind you that there is nothing wrong with being an elitist. I'm quite proudly one. People should aspire to be elite. Not ordinary. I think talking heads on rightwing TV have sorta made that into something bad. It's not.

Tony Baxter was an elite Imagineer. There are plenty of non-elites left. Who would you rather have designing an attraction for WDW?

But back to said subject ...

In Walt's day, you could enjoy the park without spending TOO much on admission. Going on the big attractions meant more money. Going on the smaller attractions meant less money.

In 2015 (to choose a date), they could, if they wanted to, create a world where admission wasn't too much and extra value could be had if you had the money. BUT - and this is a big but - this only makes sense if admission isn't too much.

If they want to keep admission around $90 and then also tack on upcharges for FastPass and so on.... we have left the train station and sanity is far behind us.

See, I totally agree with you here. But Disney isn't looking to sell $25 admission tickets that get you in the gates and let you see any parades or shows, worst locations though, and then let you pay as you go. So, if all you want to do is say ride Mansion, JC and Peoplemover, you could have a nice, fun and CHEAP day at the MK.

Naturally, they want to charge you $100 plus a day and then ADD on from there.

If they reduced admission to $25 and charged $5/ride, we'd be back in the land of sanity. $5 in 2011 is 66 cents in 1959 terms (when coupons were created), and in the real 1959, such coupons cost 50 cents individually, or 35 cents when bought in bulk. In other words, Walt would probably view $5/ride for an E-ticket to be expensive in 2013, but not overly so.

The problem is scale. And greed. Today's company doesn't want Walt-sized profits. It wants Wall Street-sized profits. Those are not mutually compatible.

You can't (sadly) disagree with that.

 

[WDW1974]

I think the average guest for the most part would hate that.
Combining the two most hated business models in the Tourism industry sounds like a bad idea.

Ah, young Dreamfinder, you mistakenly assume that Disney is run by people in the tourism industry or with knowledge of their own product.

It isn't and they don't.

They are going to do whatever makes best short term business sense for them.

And, yes, that mentality is destroying Disney and America.