Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 05:26:09 GMT

I don't know if I once knew this and forgot, but I don't remember knowing that "Brother Bear" was 10 years in the making. My husband and I are huge "Brother Bear" fans, so it was nice to get a little inside info.

I think that any Disney movie with cute, furry animals will sell more plushes than movies without cute, furry animals- the cute, furry animals appeal to both boys and girls (while Princess plushes don't, for example).

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:25:41 GMT

Seems like a misleading headline ... the guy says the movie was made "presumably" for that reason ... even the "insider" doesn't really know if that was the case or not.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 10:51:07 GMT

"Brother Bear" went through all those years in development because they didn't have a story concept, just a marketing one. As soon as Lion King was a hit (not only in theaters, but even more so in plush retail), Mr. Eisner wanted another animal film. "I want 'Lion King' in North America", was the quote bandied around the studio.

They had a marketing concept, not a story for years, They weren't looking for heart, just dollar signs. The development team went through many writers, concept artists, directors and 'development execs' until the floundering orphan project came to Florida around 1998/99.

It was Aaron Blaise who picked up the mantle, begged for it in fact. Aaron loves bears, has been doing wildlife paintings of them for years (plus he shares a love of Albert Bierstadt paintings with Michael E.). He lead the team that got the story up and running. Early in 2000 Bob Walker was teamed up with Blaise and with their producer, Chuck Williams, they went in search of the story's soul -- not it's toy line.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:10:52 GMT

You know these stupid marketing concerns are nothing new. I remember how worried the studio heads were about The Lion King because there were no humans, specifically no "princess character" to placate the Barbie crowd, and they were astounded when it went on to make over a billion dollars in merchandise revenue.

The bottom line is that a good movie sells itself. These overpriced execs with their MBAs can research trends and reanalyze the figures from previous films until the the end of time, but the truth is they haven't got a clue as to how to make a successful animated feature.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:44:58 GMT

This "writer" guy sounds like he should have been laid off a long time before he left.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:03:35 GMT

By the way, I did not intend to disparage the artists working on the film before it came to Florida. I was intending to point a finger at the directives they were given, the constant changes from above as they searched in vain for something that would grab certain development execs who had risen through the ranks of the accounting department.

There wasn't a person who could champion the story.

I think when it came to Florida, it escaped all the big cheeses who were jockeying for credit on what was supposed to be the next Lion King.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:29:14 GMT

ON THE TIME CARD THING . . .

The reason six-figure professionals fill out time cards is not to track their comings and goings, but to correctly allocate their time to the various projects they are working on.

The time card is how a salary becomes a capital asset. When a completed film (or theme park attraction) goes onto the books, the salaries of the people who create it are included in setting the value of the asset. Then the asset can be depreciated over time, lowering Disney's tax liability.

If the hours don't get on the time card, this doesn't happen.

People elsewhere in the entertainment community don't usually see this (they fill out time cards for other reasons), because they are usually working on just one project at a time.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:13:30 GMT

I actually read this book a few weeks ago.

It was a pretty good read.

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:19:57 GMT

Wow, no wonder prices keep going up - $6K a week to play foosball!

re: Was "Brother Bear" really put into production because Michael Eisner thought that the Disney Store would then be able to sell more plush ?

Jim Hill — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 11:43:47 GMT

Anybody who would trade 6 grand a week to hang out with Disney artists and create, while playing foosball and ping pong, for a high stress TV job is out of their minds. I was paid a whole lot less in the TV biz for years of bust my ass work, with lots of stress. I never worked at Disney, but given this guy's description, I'd a done it for 6x less a week and never complained.

podcast directory

Jim Hill — Wed, 21 May 2008 20:35:28 GMT

Nicely put