The Winter of Disney Studio's Discontent

I'm sure it looked good on the calendar: three sure-fire hits for the holiday movie season.  First, a 3-D animated Christmas film from award-winning director Robert Zemeckis, using the same motion capture technology that Zemeckis used to create "The Polar Express."  Instead of Tom Hanks performing multiple roles, it would now be Jim Carrey performing in "Disney's A Christmas Carol."  Next, a broad family comedy reuniting the director of the surprise blockbuster "Wild Hogs" with star John Travolta and adding Robin Williams for "Old Dogs."  Last, a triumphant and long-anticipated return to hand-drawn animation and classic fairytales, "The Princess and the Frog."  Now on the cusp of the new year, Disney instead has two disappointments and an outright bomb.  What happened?

"Disney's A Christmas Carol" -- First of all, I hate this title.  This will be addressed in a future post, but to me it's a branding shortcut that insults the audience.  When the film debuted to a less than stellar $30 million, some blamed the release date (first week of November) as being to early for a Christmas film.  But other Christmas-themed films have successfully debuted in that same time frame.  "Carol" showed some staying power and has grossed a respectable $135 million, but that's still less than "The Polar Express" made five years ago.  And for all the talk of dead-eye syndrome and the uncanny valley, "The Polar Express" is an original and charming story.  "A Christmas Carol" is, well, a tale as old as time.  Zemeckis keeps getting better at the motion capture animation and he makes excellent use of the 3-D environments, but his film lacks warmth and wit and charm.  It's simply a very competently told version of the story.  Without the 3-D gimmick there's not much of anything unique to recommend it.

"Old Dogs" -- I don't have much to say about this.  I have not seen the movie, but from the early trailers onward this looked like a lazy, tired, formulaic comedy that aimed squarely for mainstream audiences and apparently mainstream audiences completely saw through it.  The marketing conveyed nothing but uninspired gags, the movie title and poster were confusing (is this a "Beethoven" type of comedy about dogs?) and it's been over a decade since Robin Williams toplined a successful movie.  What were they thinking?  The movie has grossed about $46 million since it's debut a month ago and its box office run is essentially over.  A total dud.

"The Princess and the Frog" -- There was so much hope and promise bound up in this film, it may have been impossible for it to fully deliver.  But, realistic or not, this was supposed to be the beginning of the next golden age, the return of the great fairytale musicals of Disney's past such as "The Little Mermaid" and "Beauty and the Beast," and the coronation of John Lasseter as savior of Disney animation.  Personally, I think they nailed it.  I loved it.  The animation is truly beautiful, the songs are charming, the vocal performances are perfect.  Most critics seem to agree.  Richard Corliss at Time called it the movie of the year (that may be a bit much, but okay).  But you know what?  Audiences aren't really buying it.  It's grossed $70 million to date, and it looks on track to finish in the range of Disney's other recent middling animation successes such as "Bolt" or "Chicken Little."  To be an unqualified success, this needed to be a Pixar-sized hit.

I don't know why the audience isn't showing up, but I have a kernel of a theory.  The uniqueness of the film is that it is Disney's first modern fairytale.  It is not set in a storybook world, it's set in 1920s New Orleans.  The net effect is that the film really plays like a richly layered valentine to the Big Easy.  The attention to detail is truly remarkable.  As a native son of the Bayou State I loved it, but I wonder if it also limits the broad appeal of the film.  In the upcoming weeks we'll learn if word-of-mouth will sustain the film to higher grosses, but right now the "Alvin and the Chipmunks" sequel has a clear a strangle hold on the family market.  The redeeming hope for "Princess and the Frog" is that it will prove itself on the consumer products side by reinvigorating the Disney Princess brand.  This would follow the pattern of "Cars," which continues to be a merchandise juggernaut after what was considered to be a disappointing box office run in 2006 (and it grossed over $460 million worldwide!).

What does this mean for the future?  Three thoughts: 1) Iger's decision to dismiss former studio chief Dick Cook continues to look justifiable.  2) John Lasseter has yet to produce a big hit outside of Pixar.  There's no question that "Princess and the Frog" is a high-quality product, but  Lasseter is supposed to re-build Walt Disney Animation Studios into a powerhouse on par with Pixar.  Lasseter's success with Pixar has given him broad influence not only over animation but also into merchandising and the theme parks.  If Disney animation continues to struggle, will his influence and reputation diminish?  3) Disney has signed high-profile deals with Zemeckis (through his ImageMovers production company) and with Steven Spielberg (though DreamWorks Pictures) to help fill their pipeline of filmed content.  The first product of those deals was a disappointment.  Will Disney come to regret these deals?  With product from Zemeckis, DreamWorks, Pixar, and soon Marvel, in addition to Disney live-action and Disney animation, will new studio boss Rich Ross have trouble positioning all of these productions successfully?  This calls to mind the problems Disney had with Walden Media regarding the Narnia franchise.  2010 will be an interesting transition for Walt Disney Studios as they release another ambitious and unproven slate of films.

Remembering Roy

Roy Edward Disney, nephew of Walt Disney and son of Roy O. Disney, died today at the age of 79.  The LA Times has a thorough obit and photo gallery up, and the Walt Disney Company has put out a statement as well.  In short, this is a seismic loss for both the company and for Disney fans everywhere.  To many, Roy served as the conscience of the Walt Disney Company, a kind of Jiminy Cricket who vigilantly worked to protect the company's values and ensured that they would endure into the future.  He saved the Walt Disney Company from near-certain ruin twice, both times ousting the existing executive leadership to force a change in the company's strategic direction.  And he was particularly devoted to preserving the company's preeminent focus on animation.  He presided over the Disney's animation renaissance in the late 80s and early 90s as head of the animation division, and he personally shepherded through Fantasia 2000, a labor of love that fulfilled Walt's ambition to continue the Fantasia experiment.

Roy bore a striking resemblance to his uncle, which lent him an air of celebrity (particularly with hard core Disney fans) and served him well as he waged his battles to protect the company created by his uncle and his father, especially the very public battle he fought from 2003 to 2005 that resulted in the departure of CEO Michael Eisner.  With Roy's passing, it's unlikely that any other member of the Disney family will ever take such an active role in the company. 

Roy Disney got his start with the Disney company by working on the "True-Life Adventures" films.  It's bittersweet, then, that this year Disney returned to the tradition of those films under the new DisneyNature production banner.  And just last week, Disney made its much anticipated and triumphant return to traditional hand-drawn animation with the release of The Princess and the Frog.  And now, like his uncle and father, Roy E. Disney himself has become a part of the storied Disney legacy. 

Delayed Gratification

On December 18, James Cameron's Avatar will come storming into movie theaters, claiming to be a 3-D digital sci-fi spectacle unlike anything we've ever seen.  Some folks on the web have expressed skepticism about that claim, but I'm still hopeful the movie will deliver something close to its very big promises. 

But, if I'm being really honest, I'm much more excited about the 3-D digital sci-fi spectacle that will be coming to theaters next Christmas.

"Let's never forget. It all started with a mouse."

It's been a while since I've been able to post anything new, but I'd be remiss if I neglected to recognize that 81 years ago today, Steamboat Willie premiered at the Colony Theater in New York City, thus marking the "official" birthday of Mickey Mouse.  Happy birthday, Mickey.  You look better than mice half your age.

Connect Four

Well, there's really nothing connecting these four items, they are simply a few of the stories and blogs that have caught my attention this week that I wanted to comment on.

1) When I first read that the FCC was going to look at issuing new regulation regarding so-called "net neutrality" I planned to write a lengthy blog post on it.  But then I saw this posting over at RedState.com and I decided that there is no use parroting what someone else has already said so well.  The fundamental question is this:  Do you really want to put the federal government in charge of the Internet?  Because that's what this is.  It's about giving the government the authority to decide the right way and the wrong way to manage the Internet, it's about allowing the government to pick winners and losers among Internet companies and service providers, and it's about the government limiting your choices as a consumer.  I don't understand how anyone could think this is a good idea.

2) Hollywood celebrities have taken on a new urgent cause with the arrest of Roman Polanski in Switzerland and his pending extradition to the United States over 30 years after he fled the country.  Lest anyone feel sorry for this man, here is a stark reminder of exactly what he did to put him in his current situation.  Do not give this man your sympathy.  Hollywood knows no shame.

3) I hesitate to put too much stock in unproven, unattributed speculation, but this item suggesting that Disney may attempt future "Pirates of the Caribbean" films without Johnny Depp raises interesting issues given Depp's reported disappointment with the firing of Dick Cook.  As I've said before, Depp is to Pirates what Harrison Ford is to Indiana Jones.  It just won't work without him.  Remember when George Lucas launched the "Young Indiana Jones" tv series?  You probably don't.  It flopped.  I'm personally a big fan of that show, but audiences just weren't interested in Indy if Ford wasn't the guy on the screen.  Disney needs to understand that there is no chance that a big screen Pirates movie will succeed without Depp.  He appears to still be commited to number four.  Let's just take it one at a time and not get too far ahead of ourselves, okay?

4) Finally, there's a couple of interesting looks at the business of big media.  A NY Times piece previews an upcoming book positing that media companies have embraced rapid growth in pursuit of short-term gains and trends while in fact losing long-term value.  The AOL-TimeWarner merger is the obvious example of this, but News Corp's purchase of MySpace is another example.  Disney has experienced their own headaches of this sort, notably the acquisitions of Infoseek and the Fox Family Channel.  Then there's this interesting speech given by Bill Mechanic, former studio chief at Fox who was also once an executive at Disney, regarding the state of the motion picture industry.  His remarks contain a certain amount of self-aggrandizing pats-on-the-back, but he articulates a pretty compelling grasp of the challenges that face the studios.  I can't help but think he would be an attractive candidate for Disney's new studio vacancy.

Strange Tides

Two weeks ago today at the D23 Expo, Walt Disney Studios Chairman Dick Cook offered a star-studded, crowd-pleasing look at Disney's ambitious upcoming film slate, showcasing stars and celebrity filmmakers such as Johnny Depp, Miley Cyrus, John Travolta, Nicolas Cage, Tim Burton, Robert Zemeckis, Jerry Bruckheimer, Guillermo del Toro, and even the Muppets.  One week ago today, Cook was fired from the place he had worked for 38 years.

All the messy details have been widely reported, but suffice it to say that 1) Mr. Cook was completely blindsided and 2) he probably should have seen it coming.  For the last couple of years, the studio has released a steady stream disappointments and under-performers.  Some recent examples include "Bedtime Stories," "Race to Witch Mountain," "Confessions of a Shopaholic," "G-Force," and the 3D Jonas Brothers concert movie.  "Bolt," which was supposed to be the animation studio's return to quality and was well-reviewed, couldn't even match the box-office haul of the much maligned "Chicken Little."  Disney CEO Bob Iger has been so frustrated by the studio division that he called them out during a conference call with financial analysts. 

Since 2006, the only real bright spots for Disney have been been sequels to established franchises (Pirates and National Treasure), Pixar films, 2007's surprise hit "Wild Hogs," and this summer's Sandra Bullock comeback vehicle, "The Proposal."  Even some franchises have fallen short.  Disney killed their own golden goose when they botched the release of "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian;" and "High School Musical 3," the first film from Disney's crown jewel franchise to be released in theaters, could only muster $90 million in box office, far less than other recent movie musicals such as "Hairspray" and "Mamma Mia!".  Today marks the release of another likely high-profile bomb, the Bruce Willis sci-fi flick "Surrogates."  Never heard of it?  That's okay, it seems like Disney only started marketing it a couple of weeks ago, as if they expected it to fail.

Clearly, then, some changes were necessary.  The studio's recent strategy already seemed to concede that they couldn't figure out what they were doing wrong, and thus they were going to outsource alot of their filmmaking to other people and hope they could do better.  This has led to long-term relationships with other production companies and filmmakers such as Steven Spielberg, Robert Zemeckis, Jerry Bruckheimer, and now Guillermo del Toro.  This was also part of the motivation for Disney's acquisition of Marvel.

At this point, you may be thinking, "well no wonder they fired him," but there is still more to the story.  Cook is what you could call a Disney lifer.  He started his career running the monorail at Disneyland and gradually worked his way up into the studio and eventually became Chairman.  He was a company man who understood the Disney brand and culture.  On top of all that, he was well-respected in the industry and had tremendous relationships with Hollywood talent.  They guy got Johnny Depp to appear in character as Jack Sparrow on stage at the D23 Expo.  Do you think just anybody could do that?  He was there to announce with Cook that a new Pirates movie is slated for 2011.  After learning about Cook's departure, however (Cook called him personally), Depp said "There's a fissure, a crack in my enthusiasm at the moment," for a new sequel.  Whoops.  Spielberg was also reportedly shocked by Cook's firing, as Cook was a big part of the reason why Spielberg took DreamWorks to Disney.  Double whoops.

It's probably a bad idea to jeapordize Disney's relationship with the star of its most important film franchise and with the most powerful filmmaker in Hollywood, so Iger better have a handle on these and other talent relationships.  Disney has alot of encouraging projects in the pipline right now, and it would be a disaster if Cook's departure sank any of them (may I personally make a plea for the Muppets?  Please?).  Another wrinkle of the story is the out-of-the blue handling of the announcement, which seems very reminiscent of the kinds of things former studio chief Michael Eisner would do (which isn't the kind of comparison you want). 

For now, all eyes are on Iger.  Does he have a clear vision for the future of Walt Disney Studios?  What are his plans for Cook's replacement?  Will he pick a Disney insider or perhaps divide the role into multiple parts reporting to him (John Lasseter already works quasi-independently as head of Pixar and Walt Disney Feature Animation)?  To me, the most important thing is to maintain the uniqueness of the Disney brand.  Although there have been a few missteps, Cook did an admirable job of restoring the Disney label as a signifier of family-friendly quality.  I hope the future promises more of the same.

Living in Fantasyland

Last weekend, Disney conducted its first "D23 Expo," a fan convention intended to function as a kind of ComicCon for Disney nerds.  Basically, it's a big PR dog-and-pony show where the Mouse can push it's latest and greatest products to its most devoted customers.  And living up to it's promise, the D23 Expo presented an avalanche of information related to both the studio and the theme parks.  Today, I'll start by providing my thoughts on some of the news related to the theme parks, and then follow up in a future post about the studio news.

The irony about the company's theme park presentation is that most all of the information presented had already been circulating around the Internet on various Disney blogs and other fansites.  The surprise then was in finding out which rumors would be confirmed and how many details would be revealed.

The first rumor to be addressed was the potential return of "Captain EO."  For those who don't recall, "Captain EO" was a 3D movie attraction that debuted in 1986 and ran until the mid-90s.  This sci-fi musical fantasy was produced by George Lucas, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, and starred Michael Jackson.  After Jackson's death, somebody had the bright idea to bring back the attraction to capitalize on the nostalgia wave and to provide a replacement for the well-worn "Honey, I Shrunk the Audience" attraction.  This same person apparently forgot that Michael Jackson had a fairly controversial history with children and neglected to consider that perhaps some families might not find sitting in a darkened theater with the man to be all that appealing or appropriate.  On the opening day of the Expo, Disney CEO Bob Iger stated that the Captain EO revival was a no-go.  However, the good folks over at MiceAge have reported that test screenings have definitely taken place and that there is still some talk behind the scenes of bringing the attraction back for a limted run at Disneyland, possibly tied to some sort of charity to blunt the association with Jackson's past controversies.  Personally, I think they'll wait and see how the upcoming Michael Jackson concert film (directed by Disney vet Kenny Ortega) performs before making a final decision.  For die-hard Disney fans, the full attraction would be a compelling curio; if you've ever watched the short film online, however, it doesn't particularly hold up very well.

My Bottom Line: This is a bad idea.  Leave EO in the past and come up with something NEW to put in place of "Honey, I Shrunk the Audience."

Another attraction involving George Lucas also received attention at the Expo.  "Star Tours" is still a reliably popular attraction at the Disney parks in both California and Florida, but it first opened in 1989 and the once state-of-the-art motion simulator ride has become old hat.  Rumors about a makeover have percolated for years, with the most recent version speculating that Disneyland in Anaheim would get a new Star Tours while Walt Disney World in Orlando had decided they were too cheap for the upgrade.  At the Expo, however, Jay Rasulo, Chairman of Disney Parks and Resorts, announced that "Star Tours II" would open in both parks in 2011.  The complete details are unknown, but the new iteration will be in 3D and will feature multiple locations from the Star Wars universe, most likely in a random fashion so that everytime you ride the attraction you get a new experience.  Rasulo also claimed that they would "do things with Star Tours that have never been done in any theme park attraction, at any theme park anywhere."

My Bottom Line: This announcement is long overdue and I hope the new ride lives up to this hype.  Honestly, the parks could benefit from more original attractions based on Star Wars and Indiana Jones, especially Disney's Hollywood Studios in Orlando.  And not simply little shows like the Jedi Training Academy, I mean real attractions.

Without question, though, the biggest theme park news from the Expo was the reveal of the new expansion of Fantasyland in the Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World.  Remarkably, this news had also leaked onto the Internet in the weeks before the Expo, much to the chagrin of Disney.  But the official reveal still made an impact because of the scale of the new expansion, the level of detail released, and because fans of the Florida parks have been starved for the kind of new development and attention that more often seems to be lavished on the California parks. 

For those with any familiarity with the Magic Kingdom, the new Fantasyland, scheduled for completion in 2013, will now stretch all the way out to completely contain what is currently Mickey's ToonTown Fair, roughly doubling the current size of Fantasyland.  The new land will include uniquely themed, interactive, meet-and-greet areas dedicated to Cinderella, Belle, and Sleeping Beauty.  Each princess will have their own unique "mini-land."  To me, Belle's mini-land is the highlight here as it will include a new table-service dining location themed to the ballroom in "Beauty and the Beast" and a new counter-service dining location themed to Gaston's tavern.

The two elements of the expansion that have captured the most attention are the new Little Mermaid attraction and the overhaul of the Flying Dumbos.  A grand, elaborate new "dark ride" themed to "The Little Mermaid" is already scheduled to open at Disney's California Adventure in 2011.  It will now be replicated at the Magic Kingdom.  If you have no idea what I'm talking about, imagine a ride like Snow White's Scary Adventure or Peter Pan's Flight, but made more on the scale of rides like The Haunted Mansion and Pirates of the Carribean.  The concept art makes it look amazing.

The iconic Dumbo the Flying Elephant is one of the true must-do attractions at Walt Disney World, and yet it can be a miserable experience because of the painfully long line that always precedes it.  The expansion plan would move Dumbo out to where ToonTown is now, but would put TWO Dumbo spinners side by side, separated by a large circus tent that will contain a vaguely described collection of interactive games.  The most intriguing part of the new Dumbo is that there will be no physical line, per se.  I have no idea how it works, but the idea is that you play games until it's your turn to ride.  If they pull it off, it's the kind of outside the box surprise that fans love about Disney parks.

And in 2014, the last phase of the new Fantasyland will debut -- Pixie Hollow.  This will be another richly themed mini-land where you can meet Tinker Bell and other fairies, but the description is left open-ended enough that there could potentially be more attractions added to this area in the future.

My Bottom Line:  Don't wimp out on us, Orlando!  For every wonderful refurbishment like the 2007 upgrade of The Haunted Mansion, there's a Space Mountain, where there were reportedly some grand plans discussed for revamping this classic ride this year but in the end the executives opted for a cheaper, easier route (we won't really know for sure what they did until the ride reopens later).  A similar tale surrounds Spaceship Earth at EPCOT, where fans have spent over a year since it's refurbishment and reopening debating whether the ending of the ride is actually finished or missing something due to a lack of funding.  This is an opportunity to blow us away.  I hope they actually go above and beyond what is depicted in the concept art.  Disney is clearly trying to keep up with the local competition, but that's a good thing.  It's been a long time since the folks at Walt Disney World have done something that truly blows you away.  They now have the opportunity to do that.