Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts Tres

Status
Not open for further replies.
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
One other random thing I wanted to mention. There is a parks and resorts talk that Tom Staggs is giving at D23 this year!

It just happens to be on October 12th in Tokyo though...
 
bubbles1812

bubbles1812

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
Last thing I wanted to say was why are people so in a huff about Spectromagic? Nostalgia and never wanting anything to change is the whole problem with Magic Kingdom. I'm also sorry to say that the electric lights parade needs the old heave-ho as well. The conceit and music work just fine, but some of it really looks like someone strung a bunch of Christmas lights onto a float in their garage. I don't understand why people like 40 year old floats! TDL's parades (Happiness and dream lights) were great, mostly because their floats aren't older than I am.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think anyone would say they'd take MSEP or Spectro over something like Dreamlights... I would love things to change! And so would a lot of other people. But we are kind of SOL since a parade like that is not in development at WDW and wont be anytime soon. So if I have to choose between a 40 year old float and a 70 year old lamer float (Yes, I realize that is subjective), then I'm going with the 40 year old one that does at least something for me. MSEP on the other does absolutely nothing for me. I skip it and go ride the rides. *shrug* I think others feel the same way, so I think the "huff" is somewhat justified, since again, no Dreamlights-like parade coming to WDW soon, and the parade we preferred went the way of the dodo.
 
culturenthrills

culturenthrills

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
To be fair, that was sorta in jest and directed at one individual who loves her. I am tired of listening to her all the time, though.

Of course maybe I am just a crotchety old Spirit. But this year is the 20th Anniversary of the absolute best most MAGICal concert I ever went to (and I have been to hundreds): Paul McCartney at the Citrus Bowl in O-Town, floor level about 20 rows from the stage.
Click to expand...


Seen McCartney twice, 10th row at RFK Stadium almost 23 years ago to the day($25 for that ticket, compare that to how much the same ticket would be now) and 20 years ago, the same tour you saw, in Charlotte, which was the concert that was broadcasted live on Fox. Seeing Paul was so magical, 2 of the best shows I have ever seen and I have seen alot. The Stones, Grateful Dead, Bruce Springsteen, Rush(10 times), The Police, so many others and U2(17 times), yes I am a huge U2 fan and feel they are one of the best live rock bands ever. Saw them in Philly almost 2 months after 9/11(they were one of the few artists who didn't postpone or cancel their tour that fall) and nothing will ever top that show. The crowd was electric from the moment they stepped on the stage, probably the only time a Philly crowd cheered for a song about New York and when the names of those who lost their lives on 9/11 where projected behind the band and on the audience during Walk On it was one of the most beautiful and amazing moments I have ever seen at a concert. I have never been to a concert where at different points I had tears of joy and sadness. Nothing will ever top that show.
 
71jason

71jason

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
And 50s should only feel moderately crowded, especially the lower range. But with so much capacity gone, so many queues wasted by FP and so many ECVs and double wide strollers, it feels much closer to being packed.
Click to expand...

Speaking of capacity, I give a fuller description in the fireworks thread, but last night BACKSTAGE was turned into a fireworks viewing area. Then a dance party.

"Bad show" just doesn't seem adequate to describe it.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
bubbles1812 said:
Well, I don't think anyone would say they'd take MSEP or Spectro over something like Dreamlights... I would love things to change! And so would a lot of other people. But we are kind of SOL since a parade like that is not in development at WDW and wont be anytime soon. So if I have to choose between a 40 year old float and a 70 year old lamer float (Yes, I realize that is subjective), then I'm going with the 40 year old one that does at least something for me. MSEP on the other does absolutely nothing for me. I skip it and go ride the rides. *shrug* I think others feel the same way, so I think the "huff" is somewhat justified, since again, no Dreamlights-like parade coming to WDW soon, and the parade we preferred went the way of the dodo.
Click to expand...
I'm sure others do feel the same way, just as others felt that way about Spectro. I felt compelled, for example, to see Spectro probably a couple of times in a possibility of dozens. MSEP, on the other hand, draws me to it every time I am there for it. It's a matter of personal taste. What I like usually loses so I am pretty happy that this time my favorite stayed and the "other one" is gone. Just happens that way. Even with all that loyalty, I would be happy to see a new parade, but, that may be a while.
 
culturenthrills

culturenthrills

Well-Known Member
I saw this post on Deadlines box office thread and thought this sums up some of the problems with Disney's name on violent action movies

"This is Branding 101. I have been posting on this site for 4 years now, since Disney acquired Marvel, about the dangers of slapping their brand on too many unlike products, ultimately creating confusion for consumers and eroding its value in the marketplace. A brand that has historically been the trusted go-to brand for wholesome family entertainment cannot also expect its brand to stretch into violent adolescent (i.e. more mature) content. It needs a different brand for that. Parents trust the Disney brand. They expect to buy its toys and have them be ‘safe’ for their kids. They expect to watch its movies and tv shows and have them be ‘safe’ for their kids. Putting the Disney logo on The Lone Ranger creates confusion for everyone. It misleads parents into thinking this is ‘safe’ for young children, when it is extremely violent and inappropriate. It turns away the mature and adolescent crowd, who are either too confused by the branding to know what to make of it, or simply shrug it of as an uncool baby movie by virtue of seeing Disney’s name. How many times does this formula have to fail before Disney gets with the program? Okay, hungry for more money, Diseny decided it needed to break out of its ‘princess’ stereotype by appealing to older children, especially boys. That was obvious enough from the Marvel acquisition. But these violent, mature boy movies they have been making recently are so off-brand. Not only do they lose money, but they kill goodwill. If Disney wants to appeal to older kids, then stick with things in the High School Musical-type universe. Develop or buy a different brand with no links to Diseny, and use that to sell gore and violence to the older boys. Don;t co-mingle Disney’s sacred brand name with this stuff. Seriously. Branding 101 folks."
 
Computer Magic

Computer Magic

Well-Known Member
photoginit said:
I saw this post on Deadlines box office thread and thought this sums up some of the problems with Disney's name on violent action movies

"This is Branding 101. I have been posting on this site for 4 years now, since Disney acquired Marvel, about the dangers of slapping their brand on too many unlike products, ultimately creating confusion for consumers and eroding its value in the marketplace. A brand that has historically been the trusted go-to brand for wholesome family entertainment cannot also expect its brand to stretch into violent adolescent (i.e. more mature) content. It needs a different brand for that. Parents trust the Disney brand. They expect to buy its toys and have them be ‘safe’ for their kids. They expect to watch its movies and tv shows and have them be ‘safe’ for their kids. Putting the Disney logo on The Lone Ranger creates confusion for everyone. It misleads parents into thinking this is ‘safe’ for young children, when it is extremely violent and inappropriate. It turns away the mature and adolescent crowd, who are either too confused by the branding to know what to make of it, or simply shrug it of as an uncool baby movie by virtue of seeing Disney’s name. How many times does this formula have to fail before Disney gets with the program? Okay, hungry for more money, Diseny decided it needed to break out of its ‘princess’ stereotype by appealing to older children, especially boys. That was obvious enough from the Marvel acquisition. But these violent, mature boy movies they have been making recently are so off-brand. Not only do they lose money, but they kill goodwill. If Disney wants to appeal to older kids, then stick with things in the High School Musical-type universe. Develop or buy a different brand with no links to Diseny, and use that to sell gore and violence to the older boys. Don;t co-mingle Disney’s sacred brand name with this stuff. Seriously. Branding 101 folks."
Click to expand...
Is the Lone Ranger a violent movie or is it along the lines of Pirates or Disney Apple Dumpling Gang?

Former Disney CEO Ron Miller used Touchstone Films, to release films that feature more mature themes and darker tones than those released under the flagship Disney. Iger just followed suit with the purchase of Marvel and Lucas Films in order to keep Disney wholesome name.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
Computer Magic said:
Is the Lone Ranger a violent movie or is it along the lines of Pirates or Disney Apple Dumpling Gang?
Click to expand...

I don't recall any of the A.D. gang pulling out a living man's heart...

Computer Magic said:
Former Disney CEO Ron Miller used Touchstone Films, to release films that feature more mature themes and darker tones than those released under the flagship Disney. Iger just followed suit with the purchase of Marvel and Lucas Films in order to keep Disney wholesome name.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Touchstone was not headlined with Disney.. and that's what they are doing here. The point is they are failing to create that separation and in turn mudding up the Disney brand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom