Would Robin Williams approve Disney using the Genie to get people to sign up for the app of the same name?

[Much-Pixie-Dust]

The real question is, “What would Mrs. Doubtfire think of the use Genie+ at all in the Disney parks?”

 

[jasminethecat]

I voted for cheese sticks. Seemed relevant.

 

[Hakunamatata]

I voted for cheese sticks. Seemed relevant.

So did I. I think.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Couldn't (immediately) find the details that I remember reading, but it was something to the effect that he took the role for a low (for the movie business anyway) rate of pay, and as part of that his contract stated that they couldn't use the Genie any more in advertising than he was in the actual movie (same percentage of the time).

They tried to focus much more on him in the advertising, and he threatened to sue the company which never happened but they did cut back to the originally agreed role for that character.

Now, how much (if any) thing that would carry over to some other use and beyond his lifetime is hard to say, or if anyone in his estate/family would care enough to try to enforce it even if it did, is a totally different question (though some things in movies/TV are strange regarding rights so it is certainly possible).

I only disagree because our discussion is about the name Genie. That is a word and concept that has been around since the Phoenicians created the alphabet. He was talking about the use of his being (in this case voice) in promotions. Genie is a word and definition that existed long before Robin voiced the character. The voice belonged to Robin Williams but the physical "drawing" of the Genie belongs to Disney and the word Genie is public domain. He would have no basis for being upset about it.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

The voice belonged to Robin Williams but the physical "drawing" of the Genie belongs to Disney and the word Genie is public domain. He would have no basis for being upset about it.

If so, Then the other 2 voice actors should have done a different voice..But, they seem to just go to the way Robin characterized him instead..

 

[jasminethecat]

I only disagree because our discussion is about the name Genie. That is a word and concept that has been around since the Phoenicians created the alphabet. He was talking about the use of his being (in this case voice) in promotions. Genie is a word and definition that existed long before Robin voiced the character. The voice belonged to Robin Williams but the physical "drawing" of the Genie belongs to Disney and the word Genie is public domain. He would have no basis for being upset about it.

I think you're blurring the lines between "would robin williams have any legal recourse on this" as if he owned the character, and "how would robin williams feel if the disney character he helped bring to life was used to gouge people's wallets".

I assume the intention of the OP's poll was the latter, and it's difficult to imagine anyone wanting a beloved character of theirs being used in a cash grab, but it's also difficult to really care what a comedian who passed away in 2014 might think about anything happening today.

I still think my vote of cheese sticks was the most relevant, and it's great that a poll like this can bring people together with normally differing opinions, like @Hakunamatata and myself. I couldn't help but notice in other threads that Hakuna and I might not sit on the same side of the political spectrum which is cool, but we share a love of fried mozzarella which is far cooler IMO. And I really respect his Lion King-themed screen name joined with an avatar picture from Ratatouille.

 

[UofMGuy423]

Loved Robin Williams, but his career was sliding and his glory days were long behind him. If he were still alive, he likely would've jumped at any opportunity to voice Genie again...including on Disney+ (i.e. Tim Allen and Santa Clause 4).

 

[Goofyernmost]

I think you're blurring the lines between "would robin williams have any legal recourse on this" as if he owned the character, and "how would robin williams feel if the disney character he helped bring to life was used to gouge people's wallets".

I assume the intention of the OP's poll was the latter, and it's difficult to imagine anyone wanting a beloved character of theirs being used in a cash grab, but it's also difficult to really care what a comedian who passed away in 2014 might think about anything happening today.

I still think my vote of cheese sticks was the most relevant, and it's great that a poll like this can bring people together with normally differing opinions, like @Hakunamatata and myself. I couldn't help but notice in other threads that Hakuna and I might not sit on the same side of the political spectrum which is cool, but we share a love of fried mozzarella which is far cooler IMO. And I really respect his Lion King-themed screen name joined with an avatar picture from Ratatouille.

Disney didn't spend major bucks as way to not get people to spend a lot of money thus gouge people's wallets. My answer was Fried Shrimp so like yourself I felt if this was really nothing more than a fluff thread (which it is) and not to be taken seriously. I just jumped in the fluff because I had nothing else to do. In other words Scarlet... I don't give a damn one way or the other!

 

[jasminethecat]

Disney didn't spend major bucks as way to not get people to spend a lot of money thus gouge people's wallets. My answer was Fried Shrimp so like yourself I felt if this was really nothing more than a fluff thread (which it is) and not to be taken seriously. I just jumped in the fluff because I had nothing else to do. In other words Scarlet... I don't give a damn one way or the other!

Your first sentence truly is goofier than most, so I admire your creativity. I can certainly understand everything else you typed, but can you please try to re-explain what the first sentence was trying to say? Did you mean that disney spends money to get people to spend money, and genie+ is not price gouging? Or disney spends a lot of money to make people not spend money, so genie+ is price gouging? Either way i am not quite sure what you're trying to say.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Your first sentence truly is goofier than most, so I admire your creativity. I can certainly understand everything else you typed, but can you please try to re-explain what the first sentence was trying to say? Did you mean that disney spends money to get people to spend money, and genie+ is not price gouging? Or disney spends a lot of money to make people not spend money, so genie+ is price gouging? Either way i am not quite sure what you're trying to say.

Sure! Disney didn't make that movie as charity. They made it to extract a lot of money. In my mind, Robin just didn't want Disney to use his name as the key to promote that particular movie. He wanted them to sell it on the merits of the movie itself. He knew he didn't own the word Genie just because he voiced it in a movie and that Disney, as the creator of the genie in the story, had a right to use the word Genie in a venue other then that movie. The word Genie itself connotates the idea of a Magic Spirit. That is what Disney is trying to convey when using it in this incredible, slight of hand, move called Genie+. Consequently they are using the word Genie to gouge the public and make them feel like the genie is working for them. They are not using it to make people think about Robin Williams. Therefore the thought that Mr. Williams would be upset is really not relevant to anything. Disney had every right to use the Word Genie for whatever they might put out to the public so that makes this a fluff thread. I can't think of any reason why Robin would even think that they were exploiting him personally. They don't even mention his name. I'm sure that he was paid handsomely for his voice and talent in the movie, but that doesn't give him ownership of a word.

 

[jasminethecat]

Sure! Disney didn't make that movie as charity. They made it to extract a lot of money. In my mind, Robin just didn't want Disney to use his name as the key to promote that particular movie. He wanted them to sell it on the merits of the movie itself. He knew he didn't own the word Genie just because he voiced it in a movie and that Disney, as the creator of the genie in the story, had a right to use the word Genie in a venue other then that movie. The word Genie itself connotates the idea of a Magic Spirit. That is what Disney is trying to convey when using it in this incredible, slight of hand, move called Genie+. Consequently they are using the word Genie to gouge the public and make them feel like the genie is working for them. They are not using it to make people think about Robin Williams. Therefore the thought that Mr. Williams would be upset is really not relevant to anything. Disney had every right to use the Word Genie for whatever they might put out to the public so that makes this a fluff thread. I can't think of any reason why Robin would even think that they were exploiting him personally. They don't even mention his name. I'm sure that he was paid handsomely for his voice and talent in the movie, but that doesn't give him ownership of a word.

Well-stated, goofy! I agree with these words.

makes me think of this...

 

[larryz]

I think you're blurring the lines between "would robin williams have any legal recourse on this" as if he owned the character, and "how would robin williams feel if the disney character he helped bring to life was used to gouge people's wallets".

You mean as opposed to Disney gouging peoples' wallets by charging them to see the movie in the first place?

 

[Minthorne]

There’s a classy way respect an actor. Then there is another way. Let’s call it authentically Disney.

 

[mergatroid]

You mean as opposed to Disney gouging peoples' wallets by charging them to see the movie in the first place?

I believe there's a rather big difference. When you pay to see a Disney movie, that's it. You're not then required to pay anything else to see the movie you've just paid to see. With Genie+ you pay to enter the parks and ride the attractions, however if you want to beat the queues by using Genie+ you're required to pay more to ride the attractions you've already paid to ride. It would be like paying to see the movie in the cinema and then being told as you take your seat "Hello sir, you've paid your $13 for the movie which is great. However we need another $5 from you now for the projectionist fee".

And yes, I'm aware that Genie+ is optional as I've literally just got back from a 15 day trip to Orlando where I'm glad to say I didn't use Genie+ once.

 

[jasminethecat]

You mean as opposed to Disney gouging peoples' wallets by charging them to see the movie in the first place?

I believe there's a rather big difference. When you pay to see a Disney movie, that's it. You're not then required to pay anything else to see the movie you've just paid to see. With Genie+ you pay to enter the parks and ride the attractions, however if you want to beat the queues by using Genie+ you're required to pay more to ride the attractions you've already paid to ride. It would be like paying to see the movie in the cinema and then being told as you take your seat "Hello sir, you've paid your $13 for the movie which is great. However we need another $5 from you now for the projectionist fee".

And yes, I'm aware that Genie+ is optional as I've literally just got back from a 15 day trip to Orlando where I'm glad to say I didn't use Genie+ once.

To elaborate on what mergatriod said, there is a bigger issue with the sustainability of the genie+ program as well because it cannot scale upwards from where it is right now. Each ride has a limited throughput and disney chooses how many lightning lane passes are allowed as well as the ratios between riders let on from the standby line and the LL line.

Right now, disney appears to be falling into the same trap that they had with FP+, where they're offering too many passes and severely stalling the progress of the standby line even worse now than they did with FP+. By stalling the standby line, they are creating artificial demand for genie+, which they will gladly sell to everyone. But even if if 100% of people bought genie+, there wouldn't be more spaces available in the LL line, and people would still suffer in the current standby line. This is why many people here believe this is not sustainable and it is a short-term cash grab. It is why I called genie+ "gouging people's wallets" in a manner you had not yet considered.

By contrast, Universal has a limited express pass system (~$100 limited add-on ticket sales or staying in deluxe resorts which is also limited by the number of rooms) that works right now because they did the math and realized that if you let in too many people into the express lane, everyone suffers. There must be a ratio-based limit for how many people from each line go through to make an efficient and profitable system. Disney didn't do the math before covid and they haven't started since. Disney has too many deluxe hotels to do the exact same thing. I have proposed a reasonable solution to this, but I don't feel like typing it all again from memory.

 

[larryz]

My point: Williams did what he did for money, not for the love of entertaining people (which he clearly did) but because he was getting paid for it.

For what they paid him, Disney bought the rights to use his voice in connection with the Aladdin movie knowing they were going to charge people to see it. Williams was a willing accomplice to that end.

Once you've sold yourself, that makes you a commodity. Most voice actors don't get a say in how their lines are used -- or not used.

I don't think he'd have anything to say about Disney using the Genie character he voiced, as long as they don't use his voice in the process.