Originally Posted By leemac <<Oh really? What happened to the plan for Nemo's Undersea Adventure's opening to coincide with Epcot's 24th anniversary on Oct 1? Wasn't that the date of the big media whoring festival, where the plans for Epcot's 25th celebration were going to be unveiled?>> Who ever said it was October 1? There has never been any plans to host the media event on that date. It is before The Seas and Finding Nemo: The Musical are ready.
Originally Posted By leemac <<The Kim Possible Improv test was originally slated for the UK area of WS, according to some other posters on that "magical" WDW discussion board. Then leemac posted it was originally slated for Innoventions. No telling what the original plans were for the four-week test, but it would appear that the Imagination pavilion is now it. I still find it odd, that this area would be chosen for their test, given how difficult it is to access this area of Imagination, whether it be the old ImageWorks upstairs, or the meet-n-greet area with Figzilla. Either one is not as accessible as UK or Innoventions.>> My understanding is that Ops at Epcot couldn't determine where they wanted it. Due to the nature of the show I guess they could change their mind again. Innoventions stuck for a while and then last I heard it was destined for the UK pavilion (although I have no idea where that was supposed to go). Now I hear it is Imagination. I'm trying to determine if the KP test is 100% definitive for Imagination.
Originally Posted By leemac <<This is why, to this day, I still do not understand why Disney wants to expand with more locations in Asia before capping-out HKDL. >> That is an easy one. It is all about the terms of the partnership. If Disney owned the park outright they could happily correct that lack of attractions. When your partner is the HK SAR government that isn't so easy. However it is easy to go and sign another deal with another willing partner. Mike I don't want to look like I'm back-peddling from my initial comments about HKDL. I did believe there was enough there from opening that would lure the 5.6m needed in the first year with new attractions coming online every year for 5 years. It seems I was wrong (although we haven't seen the completion of the year). I'm not convinced it is 100% due to the lineup but I'm not oblivious to the fact that could have had an impact on attendance.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I would say that I deep-down hope you don’t consider me as one who squelches your ability to share your (very) unique POV across on here. I gain a lot of insight from your views Lee.>> Definitely not Mike! At times it has been an uphill battle but I'll keep at it for now. It helps nurture a little bit of debate.
Originally Posted By leemac <<>>As time passes Disney and its brand becomes less and less about Walt and more about the current crop of creatives.<< HA! There are just so many angles to a reply here Lee. I’ll save my blowhard antics and just say this: Didn’t stop them from exploiting Walt’s legacy from 2001-2006. Almost to a point to fill in the void left by the LACK of any creative additions by the current crop of personnel.>> Very true. I've learnt to avoid the Walt debates now. It is a very lonely corner trying to argue my POV on the man. On the tween explosion it is a matter of exploiting both timeless characters (like Snow White) and the current trend. It should be a mixture of both. I've an issue with the Company using Pixar characters for everything but that is the only successful product that Disney have had in recent years. And the kids relate to them. I'd love to see something lasting based on the Lion King and Little Mermaid but it is such a tough sell. How can you justify developing an E-ticket on that product now? Tough.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<It is like all this Imagination pavilion talk. I've honestly heard nothing. Not a jot. Nothing official is going on. I said it and then get castigated for it because other people are saying "Yes, the pavilion will be overhauled by Oct '07 with HISTA being replaced the ride having DF returned". I've not seen or heard anything to suggest that is the case. I don't believe that timeline is even remotely possible even if they started next month.>> What the heck. I'll play along. There is a difference between design work that's been officially blessed and design work that individuals do in their spare time in an effort to get said work officially blessed. And somewhere amongst all of this semantic minutiae lies the truth about the Imagination rehab: who all is giving their time and energy to this effort, even if it has yet to be officially blessed. That's where I have a problem with most everything I've heard from official channels. There are individuals in both Glendale and Emeryville who have expressed interest in pushing this forward. Whether or not the official blessing ever comes their way is another matter. Some anonymous individuals elsewhere claim that this has already happened, while others like leemac state otherwise. Whatever the reality of the situation actually is, there is no doubt that many WDI executives and directors are not feeling very secure these days, with the strong possibility for a major layoff and restructuring looming on the horizon. And given that the new kids on the block don't wanna play by their old rules, they have plenty to be worried about. So, any creative thoughts or ideas being considered for Imagination remain hidden in the shadows, until the controllers of the purse strings bless the work with an honest-to-goodness development budget. <<The doom and gloom prophesies are well short of the mark IMO. There is a lot to be positive about in the parks arena.>> Yeah, whatever. For anyone who has been carefully monitoring the P&R landscape since Rasulo's power grab, i.e., the forming of the new "Executive Committee" last October, could have predicted that Matt would walk out the door by the end of fiscal. Forcing all resort presidents to pass their ideas through yet another added layer of executive filtering was a major slap in the face. The profit bucks do indeed stop on their desks... so why make it even more complicated for them to earn those bucks? Until Rasulo and his flying monkeys have lost their death grip on P&R, there is NOTHING "to be positive about in the parks arena."
Originally Posted By leemac <<There are individuals in both Glendale and Emeryville who have expressed interest in pushing this forward. >> There is only one person in Emeryville who has any right to be involved in WDI's business. I'm certain that those in Glendale would not be receptive to meddling from NoCal on non-Pixar projects. I'd suggest they stick to what it says in their employment contract.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<When WDI (and the Disney synergy machine) were smaller, like it hopefully will be a year from now, there was no need to have so many rather ineffective changes made to the parks. Where at one time it was an issue of freshening up things in 1986, the pendulum has completely swung in the other direction and they now can't sit on their hands for a minute. That is not what the market is demanding. It stems from the demand of having such a large payroll to justify. The heroin monkey effect ascribed to DCA could very well be given to WDI and the higher-ups over the last 12 years.>> You are the wind beneath my wings, ChiMike! This is the crux of the main problem with Glendale. Restructuring needs to happen. WDI is too big, too bloated to be nimble and flexible and cost effective. And way too political. Change is desperately needed.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<Who ever said it was October 1? There has never been any plans to host the media event on that date. It is before The Seas and Finding Nemo: The Musical are ready.>> Sounds as though "Year of a Million Marketers" has pushed back any announcements for Epcot's 25th anniversary. Too bad. Attendance between DL's 50th and Epcot's 25th would have been less-than-stellar, no matter what gimmick got pushed into the limelight. So why bother even wasting the resources? Oh that's right. The Million Marketers have to justify their professional existence. Waste. Waste. Waste.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<There is only one person in Emeryville who has any right to be involved in WDI's business. I'm certain that those in Glendale would not be receptive to meddling from NoCal on non-Pixar projects. I'd suggest they stick to what it says in their employment contract.>> How can you seriously suggest this! Over seven billion dollars was spent to acquire Lasseter, Catmull, and the Sacred Seven. Yet you feel these individuals should just keep their creativity on a very short leash staked only to the Emeryville campus? "Figment... the Paranoia Bag is FULL!"
Originally Posted By leemac <<Over seven billion dollars was spent to acquire Lasseter, Catmull, and the Sacred Seven. Yet you feel these individuals should just keep their creativity on a very short leash staked only to the Emeryville campus?>> Man how close are you to Pixar? Disney acquired Pixar and seven very talented individuals to help breathe life back into WDFA. Where do you think that $7bn was apportioned? For a company with a tremendous product portfolio or 7 individuals? Should they be concentrating on that or meddling in WDI business? The former is their only brief. It isn't paranoia. It is about putting their talent to use where it is most appropriate. Do people like Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton know how to build an attraction or develop a show? No. And they would be foolish to divert their talent to an arena that they know little about.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Yet you feel these individuals should just keep their creativity on a very short leash staked only to the Emeryville campus?>> And Burbank. Do they have any brief at Glendale? No. They are consulted on all Pixar projects but that is it. Plus they have done the animation for both Subs and The Seas. That is their specialty. Feature animation. I'd be a worried shareholder if any of those 7 feel the need to get involved at WDI when they could be developing the next $500m+ grossing movie.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Do people like Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton know how to build an attraction or develop a show? No. And they would be foolish to divert their talent to an arena that they know little about.<< While I agree completely that the merger did not intend for the seven to be running ruffshot on Glendale, let me make two quick points: 1) The folks who made WED what it was were the creme of the crop directors/artists from animation who knew how to entertain the common person via art and design. I WISH that the seven were running ruffshot over Glendale and it would not surprise me to see >>>IN THE FUTURE<<< there involvement increase. B) John IS in a position of near-absolute creative authority in WDI. Who do you think he will call on and trust down the road. A bunch of people who can't grasp that their preferences are unpopular or a bunch of people who helped him grow a company successfully based on a knack for popular taste.
Originally Posted By Skellington88 There were several big reasons why Bob Iger bought Pixar but one of the key items was that he bought it because he did not know where to take the company creatively. He paid 7 billion to get Steve Jobs to help steer the company, John Lasseter & Catmull to revive feature animation at disney, and Lasseter to make whatever changes he sees FIT to both animation and imagineering. Remember Lasseter is part of the 6 member steering comitee taht oversees the ENTIRE company. The Comitee includes Jobs, Lasseter, Iger, Cook, Staggs, and Catmull. Lasseter bypasses scum like goodman and rasolu.
Originally Posted By Skellington88 <Do people like Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton know how to build an attraction or develop a show? No. And they would be foolish to divert their talent to an arena that they know little about.> You do know that the original imagineers were all animators from disney feature animation right?
Originally Posted By leemac <<John IS in a position of near-absolute creative authority in WDI.>> I don't think using the term "near-absolute creative authority" is technically accurate. He does report directly to Bob on the WDI front but his focus has to be on WDFA/Pixar and Bob has made that clear on numerous occasions. John isn't going to be proposing attractions or developing product himself. He is going to be imparting an opinion on product presented to the WDI exec. I guess we will see how it plays out but ultimately he needs to get the WDI guys on-side. If it becomes a case of an us vs. them mentality then I'd favor WDI to win out. An entrenched imagineer is a difficult beast to move. I think John is shrewd enough to know that he can help WDI with some aspects of their creative process. His influence on the Subs has been minor but it will have a profound effect on the attraction (particularly the revised ending).
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>That is an easy one. It is all about the terms of the partnership. If Disney owned the park outright they could happily correct that lack of attractions. When your partner is the HK SAR government that isn't so easy. However it is easy to go and sign another deal with another willing partner.<< But to what end? To create two problematic resorts instead of one? Why keep entering into agreements where you can't completely control your product? It sounds like they really are trying to use the McDonald's franchise model. I'm sure you see much more of the big picture in your position, but I can't get away from the fact that this all still sounds like a short-term cash-in, with little regard to what state, or even if, these potential resorts will be celebrating their 50th. >>I've an issue with the Company using Pixar characters for everything but that is the only successful product that Disney have had in recent years.<< I agree, however, that doesn't excuse what WDP&R has done. They had the same problem in the 70s and were able to still create some great attractions. Some that are still large draws today. >>I'd love to see something lasting based on the Lion King and Little Mermaid but it is such a tough sell. How can you justify developing an E-ticket on that product now? Tough.<< You could. Look at the massive marketing machine in place for TLM's DVD this fall. Going back to the prior absence of leadership from animation in the 70's, I would like to see WDI keep on the Everest route and build more attractions without known characters. Can't argue with what designing a POTC has brought the company over the last 40 years. It's doubtfull, it seems they are bent on capitalizing on the now rather than build-up something the could last as long as POTC or HM. Stunt shows and living characters aren't going to cut it.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I don't think using the term "near-absolute creative authority" is technically accurate.<< >> John isn't going to be proposing attractions or developing product himself. He is going to be imparting an opinion on product presented to the WDI exec. << I agree, my comments weren't meant to suggest he is running the entire show. Akin to the idea that Walt personally designed and created Disneyland. I do think while of course "technically" is not his title, his oversight and authority over WDI really does lead to a description of "near-absolute creative authority" >>I guess we will see how it plays out but ultimately he needs to get the WDI guys on-side. If it becomes a case of an us vs. them mentality then I'd favor WDI to win out. An entrenched imagineer is a difficult beast to move. I think John is shrewd enough to know that he can help WDI with some aspects of their creative process. << And at the same time I do sense an aire of defensiveness and self-importance with the idea that Bob, Steve, or John need any single person currently employed with WDI. If I had the track-record that WDI has I would be pretty receptive to new ways of doing things. The potential layoff certainly points to a shift in who is depended upon and why they are choosen. If anything I would say the guys at WDI need to get John on THEIR side. At this point of time I don't think John's position demands that he placate many people. >>His influence on the Subs has been minor but it will have a profound effect on the attraction (particularly the revised ending).<< I agree, I am awaiting the future were the public gets a historical inside to what was planned and what John changed. I hope it works well.
