Why must People Try To Make Disney Out To Be Evil?

[ISTCrew20]

For some people, Disney is like the little girl who sits in front of you in math class, and answers every question right, and always does her homework. Shes perfect, and its fun to find flaws in the teachers pet...

Same thing with people hating Disney....


(i think:hammer: )

 

[General Grizz]

I wouldn't call some of that animation a "mistake" . . . :lol:

 

[Pixie Duster]

Alright now I am gonna go there. Grizzly there is a huge difference between Disney and the Company. Your problem isn;t with Disney it's with material that is risky and ranchy. If those products directly had the name Disney stamped on it to where kids would recognize it then ok, you have a right to be upset. But those extensions of the company are not meant for family entertainment. Business theory will tell you that a key to success is to diversify. The bottom line most simple reason for starting a company is to make money.

 

[General Grizz]

My problem is that the company doesn't follow Walt's vision. The company is constantly "breaking the rules" - and no, these aren't under Disney's direct names. That WOULD be bad, you're right!

But remember the company was started with a man who wanted to entertain. Not a person who wanted a quick buck - but a man who stuck to a vision and made the company what it is. . . . family-wise.

Surely, the current company DOES need money. However, this content is not Disney's lifeline; it doesn't have to do what it's doing. And this loss in vision is why Roy Disney and Stanley Gold left the company just a week ago.

 

[Pixie Duster]

I can understand that, and I definately support Roy and Stan, but I just don't have a problem with the other parts of the company because those other parts of the company are about entertaining people outside of the family environment.

 

[mkt]

I walk the fence on this...

I see NO problem with Miramax, and A&E... I don't think Walt would have any problem with the typically more high-brow products coming from these 2. Same for ABC, reality TV being discounted from this. As far as Viewers Choice... in the beginning it was fine... however, when they shifted from family friendly and general interest movies to pr0n.. yeah, that's shady. As far as E!... yeah, that's not good whatsoever.... and neither is Dimension.

 

[lebernadin]

The way i see it is if the core Disney products that your average consumer is aware about, the film archive, the parks, the stores, the cruiseline etc, are being fed money from "unsavory" products and those moneys are being used wisely, i don't care where the money came from since i'm not eating from that end of the trough, but rather the "Disney" end.

But if the moneys made on these viewers choice channels etc are poured into new opportunities along the same line, then i have a problem with that, lol...

 

[radioandy]

All the big problems with The Walt Disney Company are the problems with every giant corporation. Disney is no more "evil" than AOL, Halliburton or Wal-Mart. That is, the bottom line is the bottom line. The only question that really matters to any business is: "Did I make a profit today?"
I think what has turned some people (like the operator of that website) so bitter is that we Disney fans expect more than that. It seems to me there was a time when the quality of a product was most important, with the assumption that the profit would follow.
Disney has traditionally been the best at what it does, from children's movies, to theme parks, to quality of its employees, to its progressive policies. At least that's been my perception. But in recent years that has changed to doing things "on the cheap" as Roy Disney says.
I think the worst that can be said of Disney is, they're just doing what everyone else does.

 

[daoVinci]

I agree. The introduction of Universal Studios into the Theme park market and Dreamworks into animation SHOULD have forced Dsiney to step up and meet the challenge of quality from strong competitors. But, Rather than increasing profit margins by creating a quality product to drive demand, they're trying to increase them by investing less money in development.

As for the site...the story about The Lion King being ripped off from a Japanese animator? Well, HE ripped the story off from Shakespeare. It's simply a re-telling of "Hamlet."

It's nothing new. "The Magnificent Seven" and "StarWars" we're, in essence, re-tellings of "The Seven Samurai." "O, Brother, Where Art Thou" and "Huckelberry Finn" were both essentially re-tellings of "The Odessy."

Heck, if you think about it, "The Matrix" is simply the story of Moses...Neo[Moses] leaves Egypt [Matrix], returns to confront the Phaoroh [The Architect] and free his prople [humanity] from opression [matrix]. They even find refuge in Zion [Zion].

As William Faulkner said, "The artist is of no importance. Only what he creates is important, since there is nothing new to be said."

 

[barnum42]

Because it’s become the same as every other huge money grabbing, self-centred, power hungry, immoral, crush everything in the name of profit corporation. This is done behind a front of being a nice fluffy family friendly, all started by Uncle Walt front.

I love going to the parks and seeing some of the good that is produced by the company. But the sad fact is that the corporation behind it is a monster.

 

[SIR90210]

Originally posted by mkt
unfortunately, most of what he's written is fact.... and also during the Eisner days.

Why do you think Roy wants Eisner to resign? It's not Disney that's evil, it's Eisner. Honestly, I hope Eisner goes into a 50 year coma. I think this dude's real problem is that the companies he likes ($50 bucks that among them are playboy) can't compete with Disney, so he's doing the most childish thing possible and simply bashing Disney. He makes it seem as if Disney is the only company out there that has people dying at their theme parks. WRONG. People have died at Paramount, Six Flags, Cedar Fair, AND Universal parks, not just Disney. I think the only reason he has an issue with this Disney stuff is because he dosen't like Disney because it's better than the companies he likes in its customer satisfaction and product. He wouldn't have an issue if Dreamworks put in its animated features, I don't think. BTW, that website isn't very accurate. If you hite the "home" button on the botom of the main page, there's a link to and a website that say aliens and UFOs were involved with 9/11 :fork: :fork: :fork:

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by SIR90210
Honestly, I hope Eisner goes into a 50 year coma.

WHOA NOW...good post, but don't you think that's a little rash? I mean, he didn't kill anyone.

Unless you count the BTMR incident. . . which traces to lack of care by Cast Members. . . which is supported by his policies. :lookaroun

 

[imagineer boy]

Originally posted by ISTCrew20
For some people, Disney is like the little girl who sits in front of you in math class, and answers every question right, and always does her homework. Shes perfect, and its fun to find flaws in the teachers pet...

Same thing with people hating Disney....


(i think:hammer: )

AAW man, why does Disney have to be a girl?:lol: (j/k):wave:

 

[matt&helen]

It's all about choices. Disney chose to deal in those unsavory business practices. They do not have to deal in . There are millions upon millions of profit machines that are family friendly. It doesn't matter if they tried to hide it behind another business name. Like many of you said, Disney is a big corporation like Wal-Mart, AOL, & Microsoft, but those corporations were not started and continue to be a family-friendly business, like Disney is.
Hopefully, we can get new management in that can turn the company back to the way it started.

 

[SIR90210]

Originally posted by grizzlyhall
WHOA NOW...good post, but don't you think that's a little rash? I mean, he didn't kill anyone.

OK, I'll rephrase that: I hope Eisner decides to care about someone other than himself and resigns to let someone not obsessed with money to take over.

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by SIR90210
OK, I'll rephrase that: I hope Eisner decides to care about someone other than himself and resigns to let someone not obsessed with money to take over.

Me too.

 

[mkt]

Originally posted by grizzlyhall
Me too.

Me Three

 

[barnum42]

Me four!

 

[BG Rugger]

If you research hard enough you can find information to support any claim you want to make. Its all in how you present it. But, then again he does not cite any sources within his work so for all we know he could pull it out of nowhere. If he wanted to make a statement he should have used proper MLA Documentation and if I may add it is very poorly written. It lacks a central thesis and makes claims without providing the substantiating evidence. Also, he fails to prove if the resources used were scholarly or academic journals which are the only suitable works when discussing multi-national corporations becasue they are recognized by the NCAADS. I would also doubt anyones opinion that are blatanty biased and believe that UFOs were involved in 9/11. I would imagine he has done "extensive research" on that once he was done with his thesis paper on how the moon landings were faked in cooperation with Adolf Hitler's chriogenically frozen head.

 

[General Grizz]

Those other sites (outside of Disney) ARE illegitamite. But if you look up, for example, "Hollywood Records" and the name of the band, you can find other secondary source documents that say the same thing. (Interviews, etc.)

A lot of what he says is true. All of it? I don't have the time to find it.