The Miscellaneous Thought Thread

[Consumer]

Most of traditional Disney IP was appropriated public domain.

Disney also paid money to license Pooh, Peter Pan, Mary Poppins, Dumbo, Bambi, SotS, 101 Dalmations, The Rescuers, Fox and the Hound, Black Cauldron, Tarzan, Big Hero 6... they were all the work of somebody outside the Disney company and Disney paid them money to use their IP. They were not originally created by Disney artists for Disney.

Of course, it's Disney's own home grown original stories which set Disney apart such as Home on the Range and Brother Bear.

I never understood this argument.

Although Disney purchased the rights to use those IPs, they still made something original with them. A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh and Disney's Winnie the Pooh are two, separate, distinct iterations of the same character.

Disney did not make anything original when they purchased Lucasfilm, Marvel, Pixar, or 20th Century Fox. George Lucas's Star Wars and Disney's Star Wars are one in the same.

An apt comparison would be me going into a pottery store, being inspired by what I see, and creating a new piece of pottery based off of what I saw in the store, as opposed to me going in a pottery story, buying a piece of pottery, and then modifying it in some way.

 

[CaptinEO]

I never understood this argument.

Although Disney purchased the rights to use those IPs, they still made something original with them. A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh and Disney's Winnie the Pooh are two, separate, distinct iterations of the same character.

Disney did not make anything original when they purchased Lucasfilm, Marvel, Pixar, or 20th Century Fox. George Lucas's Star Wars and Disney's Star Wars are one in the same.

An apt comparison would be me going into a pottery store, being inspired by what I see, and creating a new piece of pottery based off of what I saw in the store, as opposed to me going in a pottery story, buying a piece of pottery, and then modifying it in some way.

Very true. Walt Disney bought the rights to and adapted stories. This is much different than the current regime that makes acquisitions and keeps them operating as is.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Very true. Walt Disney bought the rights to and adapted stories. This is much different than the current regime that makes acquisitions and keeps them operating as is.

I would say bringing Marvel and Star Wars to TV serialization is much more than "operating as is."

 

[Consumer]

I would say bringing Marvel and Star Wars to TV serialization is much more than "operating as is."

Until Walt Disney Studios remakes Star Wars (1977) with its own spin, separate from the established canon, then Disney is very much "operating as is." Same goes for Marvel.

Financing a previously existing operation to keep operating is not the same as creating something new.

 

[Californian Elitist]

If Disney is operating “as is” for Marvel and Star Wars, then they’ve absolutely been doing that since 1937 with a lot of their animated films.

 

[Consumer]

If Disney is operating “as is” for Marvel and Star Wars, then they’ve absolutely been doing that since 1937 with a lot of their animated films.

When did Disney purchase ownership of Snow White and publish a sequel to the original fairy tale set in the same continuity?

 

[Rich T]

If Disney is operating “as is” for Marvel and Star Wars, then they’ve absolutely been doing that since 1937 with a lot of their animated films.

Disagree a bit here. If Disney had purchased Fleischer Studios and made a sequel to their “Gulliver’s Travels,” or if they’d purchased MGM in the 50’s and started producing Tom and Jerry cartoons, then yeah.

But I agree it’s not quite “as is.” They made Star Wars worse (my opinion) and Marvel into a huge popular Big Mac of a movie franchise, which it had never been before. In both cases, however, they’ve made Disney more and more like just another huge, soulless media company.

 

[Phroobar]

Until Walt Disney Studios remakes Star Wars (1977) with its own spin,

They did. It's called the Force Awakens.

 

[mickEblu]

They need to turn Hungry Bear into a BBQ restaurant.

 

[Californian Elitist]

When did Disney purchase ownership of Snow White and publish a sequel to the original fairy tale set in the same continuity?

Disagree a bit here. If Disney had purchased Fleischer Studios and made a sequel to their “Gulliver’s Travels,” or if they’d purchased MGM in the 50’s and started producing Tom and Jerry cartoons, then yeah.

But I agree it’s not quite “as is.” They made Star Wars worse (my opinion) and Marvel into a huge popular Big Mac of a movie franchise, which it had never been before. In both cases, however, they’ve made Disney more and more like just another huge, soulless media company.

Purchasing ownership doesn’t matter, for me. I’m referring to the general act of taking stories written by other people and altering them, putting their own spin on them, continued them, etc. They’ve done that with both their animated films and the Star Wars and Marvel films, no matter how it’s spun.

That’s what I’m referring to.

 

[Rich T]

Purchasing ownership doesn’t matter, for me. I’m referring to the general act of taking stories written by other people and altering them, putting their own spin on them, continued them, etc. They’ve done that with both their animated films and the Star Wars and Marvel films, no matter how it’s spun.

That’s what I’m referring to.

I see your point. For me, the big difference is that, with Star Wars and Marvel, they are building off of two properties and keeping the already established designs, music, detailed backstories, etc, and calling the new telling a Disney product. This, to me, is very different from taking a European fairytale, giving all the characters distinct designs, personalities, etc. for the first time and setting it to music. By the time Alice in Wonderland was made by Disney in the 50’s, the end product was recognizable as Lewis Carroll’s story, but it was distinctly reimagined as the “Disney Version” (much to the disgust of literary purists of the time) by the in-house Disney artists such as Mary Blair, Claude Coates, Frank Thomas, Ollie Johnston, etc. It was the in-house consistency that created what’s become the public “Disney” which is now, in my opinion, losing its identity.

I guess it’s all about where one draws the line. For me, genuine-feeling “Disney” ends at about the point where Frank Wells died. There have been a few wonderful animated films since, but now we’re just watching a huge media giant trying to make as much money for its executives as possible, gobbling up as many ready-to-microwave-and-serve IPs as it can get hold of. And, of course, milking all its existing properties into the ground.

 

[Brer Panther]

They need to turn Hungry Bear into a BBQ restaurant.

Wouldn't that actually be a BEAR-B-Q restaurant?





...I'll show myself out.

 

[Phroobar]

They need to turn Hungry Bear into a BBQ restaurant.

I miss the ribs at Disneyland. I try to avoid the Hungry Bear because the food is so Tomorrowland Terrace icky. However I loved sitting by the river and feeding the ducks. There were little seceded places to eat there.

 

[mickEblu]

I miss the ribs at Disneyland. I try to avoid the Hungry Bear because the food is so Tomorrowland Terrace icky. However I loved sitting by the river and feeding the ducks. There were little seceded places to eat there.

Hungry Bear being right on the River is missed. Exactly, you can get the food they currently serve at Tomorrowland Terrace. BBQ at Hungry Bear makes so much sense. I’m guessing the reason they haven’t done it has to do with margins. Why spend the money for quality meats when you can make a killing on cheap ground beef? Do you think it could have something to do with kitchen set up? I guess I just don’t understand how they didn’t move the BBQ over to Hungry Bear after Big Thunder BBQ closed. We all thought for sure they were going to have a BBQ spot in Galaxies Edge.

 

[Phroobar]

Hungry Bear being right on the River is missed. Exactly, you can get the food they currently serve at Tomorrowland Terrace. BBQ at Hungry Bear makes so much sense. I’m guessing the reason they haven’t done it has to do with margins. Why spend the money for quality meats when you can make a killing on cheap ground beef? Do you think it could have something to do with kitchen set up?

I don't think they have a grill. The hamburger is fried or warmed up. It would be great if they had an outdoor grill like Knotts has. Grilled corn on the cob. Texas toast. Half a chicken. It could make the Hungry Bear something really special.

 

[mickEblu]

I don't think they have a grill. The hamburger is fried or warmed up. It would be great if they had an outdoor grill like Knotts has. Grilled corn on the cob. Texas toast. Half a chicken. It could make the Hungry Bear something really special.

Would it be that hard to just add a grill?

 

[Consumer]

I always enjoy the fried chicken sandwich at Hungry Bear. It's my go-to Disneyland meal.

 

[mickEblu]

I always enjoy the fried chicken sandwich at Hungry Bear. It's my go-to Disneyland meal.

It’ll still be there. It’ll just have some BBQ sauce on it.

 

[TP2000]

I don't think they have a grill. The hamburger is fried or warmed up. It would be great if they had an outdoor grill like Knotts has. Grilled corn on the cob. Texas toast. Half a chicken. It could make the Hungry Bear something really special.

No kidding! BBQ at Hungry Bear is a great idea.

But, today's TDA is incapable of it. They can do it at Knott's, and they do it at Knott's easily and very well. Just look at that grillmaster in the photo working with pride to produce quality, fresh BBQ for his customers! Bravo Knott's Berry Farm! (I'm also now realizing I'm missing this year's Boysenberry Festival! Dangit!)

But at Disneyland, run by TDA executives who don't actually use or understand their own product? Won't happen. They'd have to buy new kitchen equipment. They'd have to accept lower profit margins. They'd have to get a WDI intern to write a backstory involving a fabulously wealthy Latina woman in 1890 who turned over her successful barbecue restaurant to an employee-owned cooperative.

It would cost too much money for Disneyland to do. They can't do it. They're stuck serving bad hamburgers. Only Knott's can do it.

At the close of the bell today on the New York Stock Exchange...
Knott's Berry Farm parent company Cedar Fair market capitalization = $2.3 Billion
Disneyland parent company Walt Disney Company market capitalization = $179.2 Billion

 

[CaptinEO]

I miss the ribs at Disneyland. I try to avoid the Hungry Bear because the food is so Tomorrowland Terrace icky. However I loved sitting by the river and feeding the ducks. There were little seceded places to eat there.

Hungry Bear does have Barbeque.

I had one of the worst meals I've ever had in my life when I went to Disneyland last year and got the 2022 Hungry Bear Fantasmic package. Had never got a dining package before.

In one meal I had the worst ribs, worst broccoli, worst potatoes, worst coleslaw, and worst brownie I've ever had. It was astoundingly bad. I'm not just saying it was mediocre or generic, it was actually disgusting and repulsive.

Oh and the "dining package" makes you line up an hour and a half before the show. What the heck is the point?