Connect with us

Film & Movies

So you think that Disney Consumer Products isn’t “Brave” enough to continue on with its Merida makeover? Think again

Published

on

While I was away in San Diego,
The-World’s-No.-1-Brave-Fan sent me this e-mail:

I was wondering what your take was on that whole Merida
makeover controversy
which happened back in May. Do you think that it was wise
of Disney Consumer Products to try & turn Pixar’s first princess into one
of their glitzy & glamorous Disney princesses?


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

What do you mean “try” ?

Look, I know that over a quarter of a million people signed
that Change.org online petition asking Disney to ” … say no to the Merida
makeover, keep our hero ‘Brave’.” And as a direct result of the media
firestorm that followed, the Company did remove some 2D artwork from the Disney
Princess website
which showed a glamorized version of this Pixar character and
then replaced that artwork with CG images of Merida
as she originally appeared in Pixar’s 2012 theatrical release.


The current version of the Merida
page over at the Disney Princess website.
Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc.
All rights reserved

But if you think that this very public gesture means that
The Walt Disney Company has now abandoned its efforts to sell and/or promote a
more glamorized version of Merida, please
allow me to direct your attention to the July / August 2013 issue of “Disney
Princess” magazine …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… which features a picture story that shows the glamorized
version of this “Brave” character being welcomed into Disney’s royal
court by Belle, Cinderella, Jasmine …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

 

… Mulan, Ariel and Briar Rose.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

Not to mention this “Emotions Eleven” Disney
Princess t-shirt

that the online version of the Disney Store currently has available for purchase.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

Or the backpack / lunch tote combination on the left in the picture below that’s currently on sale at the Disney Store’s Back to School shop.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… or this rolling luggage case …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… or this Disney Princess pencil box.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

Look, to be fair here, the above items were already in
Disney’s distribution channels when the Merida
makeover controversy erupted back in May. But given all of the bad publicity that
Mickey has had to deal with since those images of the glammed-up version of
this “Brave” character first began popping up online, Disney Company
officials could have easily just opted to pulp the entire run of the July /
August 2013 issue of “Disney Princess” magazine and/or removed all of these Disney Princess items from the Disney Store’s online catalog. But
the Mouse didn’t do that.

And why not? Because the Company knows that — in spite of
the Merida makeover controversy
back in May — there is still a very large & incredibly passionate group of
consumers and collectors out there who are eager to get their hands on glammed-up
versions of this “Brave” character.

That’s the part of this story which I think the people who
signed that Change.org petition didn’t entirely understand. That Disney
Consumer Products didn’t create a spanglier, sleeker version of Merida
just because it was looking for ways to annoy female empowerment proponents.
But — rather — because they were looking to create another product for Disney
Princess fans to purchase.

And make no mistake, folks. Given that this particular brand
generates $4 billion in sales annually for The Walt Disney Company, there are an
awful lot of Disney Princess fans out there. And among the products that this
coveted group of consumers responds mostly strongly to are (you guessed it) glammed-up versions of the Disney royals.

Now please keep in mind that it’s only been since 2000 that Disney
Consumer Products has been marketing these beloved Disney heroines as a group.
Or — rather — a set. With the hope that girls and women of all ages will then
(to borrow a line from the Pokémon theme song) ” … gotta catch ’em
all.”

Mind you, in order to now sell the Disney Princesses as an actual set of
characters (rather than a loose grouping of individual princesses), Disney
Consumer Products had to tweak the look of some of the Studio’s earlier
princesses so that their design would then be more consistent with Disney’s
more recent royals (i.e., Ariel, Belle & Jasmine). Which is why the Snow
White of today …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc.
All rights reserved

… looks decidedly different from the way that Disney’s first princess was depicted during her debut in 1937.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

And Cinderella received a similar sort of makeover out
ahead of last year’s Blu-ray release on this Disney animated feature
. With this
being how Cindy looked back in 1950 …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… and the below image being the way that DCP has
reimagined this Disney Princess for today’s consumers.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

You see what I’m saying here, right? That it’s not just Merida
who recently received a makeover. That the other Disney Princesses have
been glitzed & glamored up as well. All with the hope that the people who bought the
Ultimate Disney Princess Collection when Tiana joined the royal family back in
2009 …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… and then sprang for a similar set of dolls when Rapunzel
became a Disney Princess back in 2010 …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… would now want to purchase the 2012 version of the
Ultimate Disney Princess Collection. Just so that they could then own a version
of this playset where Merida has a
look & a design that’s consistent with all of the other Disney Princesses.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

That — when you get right down to it — is why Disney
Consumer Products really gave Merida
her makeover. They weren’t actually looking for ways to make this Pixar
character seem sleeker or sexier. But — rather — this was really all about DCP
finding ways to make Merida’s look
consistent with all of the other Disney Princesses that were already out there. So that
it would then be easier for Disney Consumer Products to sell these characters
as a set.

Don’t believe me? Okay. Then let’s take another look at the
CG version of Rapunzel from “Tangled.” Back when the artwork
associated with this character was still loaded with plenty of personality.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

Now take a look at the official Disney Princess version of
Rapunzel. While this 2D take of this “Tangled” character is now admittedly
looks much more regal & glamorous, it has also lost a lot of the quirky
detail that originally made Rapunzel so appealing.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

But for little girls (who — according to DCP’s own market
research — would genuinely prefer to own a set of Disney Princess dolls where
all of these characters have a very consistent look & design), the fact
that the doll versions of Rapunzel or Merida that they’re playing with don’t
actually look all that much like the versions of these characters as they
appeared in their respective CG films ultimately doesn’t matter all that much.
What  DOES matter is that — because the dolls in the Ultimate Disney Princess
Collection set are all the same height and share the same design aesthetic …
Well, that then makes it that easier for these children to imagine that these
Disney Princess dolls are actually friends. Which then makes playing with /
owning a set of dolls like this a far more enjoyable / desirable experience.
Which is what then helps to keep sales so high for this particular line of DCP
products.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

So in the end, Merida’s
makeover wasn’t really about feminizing and/or glamming up this particular
Pixar character. But — rather — making the newest Disney Princess look more
like all of the Disney Princesses that were already out there. Which then made things far
easier for the folks at Disney Consumer Products when it came time to sell
t-shirts & doll sets which featured this brand / group of characters together
as a set.

Mind you, there are artists out there who have figured out
how to draw / portray the Disney Princesses in such a way that — while they
still have a unifying look & design — these characters retain much of
their individual quirks & personalities. Case in point: Amy Mebberson’s
Pocket Princesses
. Which actually manages to mine quite a bit of humor out of
the idea that — were Merida to
ever actually be folded into a grouping of Disney Princesses — this fiery
Scottish lass would then probably have a lot of trouble fitting in.


Copyright Disney / Acme Archives Direct. All rights reserved

I mean, check out “Singalong,” this limited
edition piece that Mebberson just created for Acme Archives Direct. Which
clearly shows how Merida probably
wouldn’t be all that enthusiastic when it came to all these Disney Princesses
coming together and singing stuff.


Copyright Disney / Acme Archives Direct.
All rights reserved

Look, no disrespect to the people who sign that Change.org
petition back in May. They saw that a CG version of Merida
had replaced the 2D glammed up version of this Pixar princess which had
previously appeared on the Disney Princess webpage and figured “We won.”
And they then moved on to the next online controversy.

But as for Disney Consumer Products, once the Merida
makeover PR crisis had passed, it was pretty much back to business as usual in
regards to the Disney Princess brand. If anything, given that
“Frozen” is headed into theaters in late November …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… DCP is already transitioning from marketing a glammed-up
version of Merida to looking for unique
& exciting ways to introduce Disney’s two new princesses — Anna & Elsa
— to the world.

Again, let me stress here that I mean no disrespect to the
251,160 people who (to date) have signed that online petition over Change.org
which asked The Walt Disney Company to ” … keep our hero brave.”
I’m sure that these folks had their hearts in the right place. But that said,
I still don’t think that they entirely understood what DCP was doing with its Merida
makeover. Which was answering the need of a very specific, incredibly
lucrative market segment that actually likes these glammed-up version of the
Disney Princesses.

I mean, if you folks are really looking for something Disney
Princess-related to get upset about, then please let me draw your attention to
these …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… the Disney Princess
Palace Pals
. Which is this all-new
collection of overly-cute kittens, puppies & ponies that DCP has recently
come up with as a way to expand the Disney Princess product line.

I don’t know why it is that something like the Disney
Princess Palace Pals offends me more than a Merida
who’s been deliberately glammed-up. I mean, I get that a redesigned version of this
“Brave” character would then be a better visual fit whenever she’s
grouped with Cinderella, Tiana and the rest of the Disney royals …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… whereas the  whole
Disney Princess Palace Pals product line just comes across (to me, anyway) as this naked cash
grab.

More to the point, while I can understand why some folks may
think that this glammed-up version of Merida
undercuts the original message of this Mark Andrews / Brenda Chapman film, here’s the hard reality: Not a single frame of that Pixar film has been
changed. More importantly, the  message
of female empowerment that people got when they watched “Brave” after
it first debuted in theaters back in June of 2012 hasn’t been changed either. Nor
will that message change in the decades yet to come whenever people sit down to watch this Academy Award-winner.


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

These glammed-up Merida
dolls and/or the other products that feature this “Brave” character
folded in with all of the other Disney Princesses actually exist outside of that
movie. So those products’ ability to undermine the overall message of this particular Pixar
production is — at best — minimal.

Long story short: Disney Consumer Products created this
sleeker, glitzier version of Merida
because it was looking for ways to expand its Disney Princess brand. No one at
the Company deliberately went out of their way to try and undermine the “Change
Your Fate / Control Your Destiny” message associated with “Brave.”
What this was really all about was finding new ways to keep that $4-billion-a-year
business going / growing by creating a product that the people who actually
like the Disney Princess line might then want to purchase.

And speaking of keeping the Disney Princess brand going /
growing, if you enjoy that coronation ceremony that DCP held for Princess Tiana
in Manhattan’s Grand Ballroom back
in March of 2010 …


Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved

… or the coronation ceremony that Disney Consumer Products
staged for Rapunzel at Kensington Palace
in London in October of 2011 …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… or the regal celebration that DCP put together back in
May of this year where Merida was welcomed into the Disney Princess royal court
in a ceremony that was staged in front of Cinderella Castle at WDW’s Magic
Kingdom …


Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved

… just wait ’til you see what Disney Consumer Products has
in the works for Anna & Elsa. I can promise you that — when it comes time
for the two sisters who drive the storyline of Disney’s “Frozen” to
finally officially become Disney Princesses — their induction ceremony is
going to be very, very cool.

Beyond that … My apologies for being off-the-air here at
JHM for the past few days. But between some family obligations as well as that
case of the creeping crud which I picked up out in San Diego last week, I’ve
basically been out of commission since I got back from Comic-Con.

But even so, I’m now making plans to return to Southern
California early next month. Where — out ahead of the D23 EXPO
Len Testa & I will be heading out to Palm Springs.
Where we’ll then be recording an all-new episode of our “Unofficial Guide
Disney Dish” podcast series that then focuses on the history of Smoke Tree
Ranch
.

And while we’re out in the desert, Len & I also plan on
shooting something for the Touring Plans’ YouTube channel. This all-new show
is supposed to be called “Ask Jim Hill.” Where (as you might have
guessed by the title) I’m then going to try and answer Disney & theme
park-related questions that people have sent in.

So if you’d like to be part of the first-but-hopefully-not-last
episode of “Ask Jim Hill,” please head on over to the TouringPlans blog
right now and then submit a question that Len & I can possibly use as part of the premiere of this new YouTube show.

That’s it for now, folks. Again, my apologies for the lack
of stories this week. I’ll get back to sharing all that I saw & heard at
this year’s San Diego Comic-Con shortly. In the meantime, you all take care,
okay?

Jim Hill is an entertainment writer who has specialized in covering The Walt Disney Company for nearly 40 years now. Over that time, he has interviewed hundreds of animators, actors, and Imagineers -- many of whom have shared behind-the-scenes stories with Mr. Hill about how the Mouse House really works. In addition to the 4000+ articles Jim has written for the Web, he also co-hosts a trio of popular podcasts: “Disney Dish with Len Testa,” “Fine Tooning with Drew Taylor” and “Marvel US Disney with Aaron Adams.” Mr. Hill makes his home in Southern New Hampshire with his lovely wife Nancy and two obnoxious cats, Ginger & Betty.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Film & Movies

Before He Was 626: The Surprisingly Dark Origins of Disney’s Stitch

Published

on

Hopes are high for Disney’s live-action version of Lilo & Stitch, which opens in theaters next week (on May 23rd to be exact). And – if current box office projections hold – it will sell more than $120 million worth of tickets in North America.

Stitch Before the Live-Action: What Fans Need to Know

But here’s the thing – there wouldn’t have been a hand-drawn version of Stitch to reimagine as a live-action film if it weren’t for Academy Award-winner Chris Sanders. Who – some 40 years ago – had a very different idea in mind for this project. Not an animated film or a live-action movie, for that matter. But – rather – a children’s picture book.

Sanders revealed the true origins of Lilo & Stitch in his self-published book, From Pitch to Stitch: The Origins of Disney’s Most Unusual Classic.

From Picture Book to Pitch Meeting

Chris – after he graduated from CalArts back in 1984 (this was three years before he began working for Disney) – landed a job at Marvel Comics. Which – because Marvel Animation was producing the Muppet Babies TV show – led to an opportunity to design characters for that animated series.

About a year into this gig (we’re now talking 1985), Sanders – in his time away from work – began noodling on a side project. As Chris recalled in From Pitch to Stitch:

“Early in my animation career, I tried writing a picture book that centered around a weird little creature that lived a solitary life in the forest. He was a monster, unsure of where he had come from, or where he belonged. I generated a concept drawing, wrote some pages and started making a sculpted version of him. But I soon abandoned it as the idea seemed too large and vague to fit in thirty pages or so.”

We now jump ahead 12 years or so. Sanders has quickly moved up through the ranks at Walt Disney Animation Studios. So much so that – by 1997 – Chris is now the Head of Story on Disney’s Mulan.

A Monster in the Forest Becomes Stitch on Earth

With Mulan deep in production, Sanders was looking for his next project when an opportunity came his way.

“I had dinner with Tom Schumacher, who was president of Feature Animation at the time. He asked if there was anything I might be interested in directing. After a little reflection, I realized that there was something: That old idea from a decade prior.”

When Sanders told Schumacher about the monster who lived alone in the forest…

“Tom offered the crucial observation that – because the animal world is already alien to us – I should consider relocating the creature to the human world.”

With that in mind, Chris dusted off the story and went to work.

Over the next three months, Sanders created a pitch book for the proposed animated film. What he came up with was very different from the version of Lilo & Stitch that eventually hit theaters in 2002.

The Most Dangerous Creature in the Known Universe

The pitch – first shared with Walt Disney Feature Animation staffers on January 9, 1998 – was titled: Lilo & Stitch: A love story of a girl and what she thinks is a dog.

This early version of Stitch was… not cute. Not cuddly. He was mean, selfish, self-centered – a career criminal. When the story opens, Stitch is in a security pod at an intergalactic trial, found guilty of 12,000 counts of hooliganism and attempted planetary enslavement.

Instead of being created by Jumba, Stitch leads a gang of marauders. His second-in-command? Ramthar, a giant, red shark-like brute.

When Stitch refuses to reveal the gang’s location, he’s sentenced to life on a maximum-security asteroid. But en route, his gang attacks the prison convoy. In the chaos, Stitch escapes in a hijacked pod and crash-lands on Earth.

Earth in Danger, Jumba on the Hunt

Terrified of what Stitch could do to our technologically inferior planet, the Grand Council Woman sends bounty hunter Jumba – along with a rule-abiding Cultural Contamination Control agent named Pleakley – to retrieve (or eliminate) Stitch.

Their mission must be secret, follow Earth laws, and – most importantly – ensure no harm comes to any humans.

Naturally, Stitch ignores all that.

After his crash, Stitch claws out of the wreckage, sees the lights of a nearby town, and screams, “I will destroy you all!” That plan is immediately derailed when he’s run over by a convoy of sugar cane trucks.

Waking up in the local humane society, Stitch sees a news report confirming the Federation is already hot on his trail. He needs to blend in. Fast.

Enter Lilo

Lilo is a lonely little girl, mourning her parents, looking for a pet. Stitch plays the role of a “cute little doggie” because it’s a means to an end. At this point, Lilo is just someone to use while he builds a communications device.

Using parts from her toys and a stolen police radio, Stitch contacts his old gang. But Ramthar, now the leader, isn’t thrilled. Still, Stitch sends a signal.

Then he builds an army.

Stitch Goes Full Skynet

Stitch constructs a small robot, sends it to the junkyard to build bigger robots. Soon, he has an army. When Ramthar and crew arrive, Stitch’s robots surround them. Ramthar is furious, but Stitch regains command.

Next, Stitch sets his robotic horde on a nearby town. Everything goes smoothly until a robot targets the hula studio where Lilo is dancing. As it lifts her in its claw, Stitch has a change of heart. He saves her.

From here, the plot begins to resemble the Lilo & Stitch we know today. Sort of.

The Ending That Never Was

In Sanders’ original version, it’s not Captain Gantu who kidnaps Lilo, but Ramthar. And when the Grand Council Woman comes to collect Stitch, Lilo produces a receipt from the humane society.

“I paid a $4 processing fee to adopt him. If you take Stitch, you’re stealing.”

The Grand Council Woman crumples the receipt and says, “I didn’t see it.”

Nani chimes in: “Well, I saw it.”

Then Jumba. Then one of Stitch’s old crew. Then a hula girl. And finally, Pleakley pulls out his CCC badge and says:

“Well, I am Pleakley Grathor, Cultural Contamination Control Agent No. 444. And I saw it.”

Pleakley saves Stitch.

How Roy E. Disney Made Stitch Cuddly

Ultimately, this version of Lilo & Stitch was streamlined. Roy E. Disney believed Stitch shouldn’t be nasty. Just naughty. And not by choice – he was designed that way.

Which is how Stitch became Experiment 626. A misunderstood creation of Jumba the mad scientist, not a hardened criminal with a vendetta.

The rest, as they say, is history.

Ricardo Montalbán’s Lost Role

Here’s a detail that even hardcore Lilo & Stitch fans may not know: Ricardo Montalbán—best known as Mr. Roarke from Fantasy Island and Khan Noonien Singh from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan—was originally cast as the voice of Ramthar, Stitch’s second-in-command in this early version of the film. He had already recorded a significant amount of dialogue before the story was reworked following Roy E. Disney’s guidance. When Stitch evolved from a ruthless galactic outlaw to a misunderstood genetic experiment, Montalbán’s character (and much of the original gang concept) was written out entirely.

Which is kind of wild when you think about it. Wrath of Khan is widely considered the gold standard of Star Trek films. So yes, for a time, Khan himself was supposed to be part of Disney’s weirdest sci-fi comedy.

Stitch’s Legacy (and Why It Still Resonates)

Looking back at Stitch’s original story, it’s wild to think how close we came to getting a very different kind of movie. One where our favorite blue alien was less “ohana means family” and more “I’ll destroy you all.” But that transformation—from outlaw to outcast to ohana—is exactly what makes Lilo & Stitch so special.

So as the live-action version prepares to hit theaters, keep in mind that behind all the cuddly merch and tiki mugs lies one of Disney’s strangest, boldest, and most hard-won reinventions. One that started with a forest monster and became a beloved franchise about found family.

June 26th is officially Stitch Day—so mark your calendar. It’s a good excuse to celebrate just how far this little blue alien has come.

Continue Reading

Film & Movies

How “An American Tail” Led to Disney’s “Hocus Pocus”

Published

on

Over the last week, I’ve been delving into Witches Run Amok, Shannon Carlin’s oral history of the making of Disney’s Hocus Pocus. This book reveals some fascinating behind-the-scenes stories about the 1993 film that initially bombed at the box office but has since become a cult favorite, even spawning a sequel in 2022 that went on to become the most-watched release in Disney+ history.

But what really caught my eye in this 284-page hardcover wasn’t just the tales of Hocus Pocus’s unlikely rise to fame. Rather, it was the unexpected connections between Hocus Pocus and another beloved film—An American Tail. As it turns out, the two films share a curious origin story, one that begins in the mid-1980s, during the early days of the creative rebirth of Walt Disney Studios under Michael Eisner, Frank Wells, and Jeffrey Katzenberg.

The Birth of An American Tail

Let’s rewind to late 1984/early 1985, a period when Eisner, Wells, and Katzenberg were just getting settled at Disney and were on the hunt for fresh projects that would signal a new era at the studio. During this time, Katzenberg—tasked with revitalizing Disney Feature Animation—began meeting with talent across Hollywood, hoping to find a project that could breathe life into the struggling division.

One such meeting was with a 29-year-old writer and illustrator named David Kirschner. At the time, Kirschner’s biggest credit was illustrating children’s books featuring Muppets and Sesame Street characters, but he had an idea for a new project: a TV special about a mouse emigrating to America, culminating in the mouse’s arrival in New York Harbor on the same day as the dedication of the Statue of Liberty in 1886.

David Kirschner
David Kirschner (IMDb)

Katzenberg saw the patriotic appeal of the concept but ultimately passed on it, as he was focused on finding full-length feature projects for Disney’s animation department. Kirschner, undeterred, took his pitch elsewhere—to none other than Kathleen Kennedy, Steven Spielberg’s production partner. Kennedy was intrigued and invited Kirschner to Spielberg’s annual Fourth of July party to pitch the idea directly to the famed director.

Spielberg immediately saw the potential in Kirschner’s idea, but instead of a TV special, he envisioned a full-length animated feature film. This project would eventually become An American Tail, a tribute of sorts to Spielberg’s own grandfather, Philip Posner, who emigrated from Russia to the United States in the late 19th century. The film’s lead character, Fievel, was even named after Spielberg’s grandfather, whose Yiddish name was also Fievel.

Disney’s Loss Becomes Universal’s Gain

An American Tail went on to become a major success for Universal Pictures, which hadn’t been involved in an animated feature since the release of Pinocchio in Outer Space in 1965. Meanwhile, over at Disney, Eisner and Wells weren’t exactly thrilled that Katzenberg had let such a promising project slip through his fingers.

Not wanting to miss out on any future opportunities with Kirschner, Katzenberg quickly scheduled another meeting with him to discuss any other ideas he might have. And as fate would have it, Kirschner had just written a short story for Muppet Magazine called Halloween House, about a boy who is magically transformed into a cat by a trio of witches.

The Pitch That Sealed the Deal

Knowing Katzenberg could be a tough sell, Kirschner went all out to impress during his pitch. He requested access to the Disney lot 30 minutes early to set the stage for his presentation. When Katzenberg and the Disney development team walked into the conference room, they were greeted by a table covered in candy corn, a cauldron of dry ice fog, and a broom, mop, and vacuum cleaner suspended from the ceiling as if they were flying—evoking the magical world of Halloween House.

Katzenberg was reportedly unimpressed by the theatrical setup, muttering, “Oy, show-and-tell time” as he took his seat. But Kirschner knew exactly how to grab his attention. He started his pitch with the fact that Halloween was a billion-dollar business—a figure that made Katzenberg sit up and take notice. He listened attentively to Kirschner’s pitch, and by the time the meeting was over, Katzenberg was convinced. Halloween House would become Hocus Pocus, and Disney had its next big Halloween film.

A Bit of Hollywood Drama

Interestingly, Kirschner’s success with Hocus Pocus didn’t sit well with his old collaborators. About a year after the film’s release, Kirschner ran into Kathleen Kennedy at an Amblin holiday party, and she wasted no time in expressing her disappointment. According to Kirschner, Kennedy said, “You really hurt Steven.” When Kirschner asked how, she explained that Spielberg and Kennedy had given him his big break with An American Tail, but when he came up with the idea for his next film, he brought it to Disney rather than to them.

Hollywood can be a place where loyalty is valued—or, at least, perceived loyalty. At the same time, this was happening just as Katzenberg was leaving Disney and partnering with Spielberg and David Geffen to launch DreamWorks SKG, which only added to the tension. Loyalty, as Kirschner found out, can be an abstract concept in the entertainment industry.

A Halloween Favorite is Born

Despite its rocky start at the box office in 1993, Hocus Pocus has gone on to become a beloved part of Halloween pop culture. And, as Carlin’s book details, its success helped pave the way for more Disney Halloween-themed projects in the years that followed.

As for why Hocus Pocus was released in July of 1993 instead of during Halloween? That’s a story for another time, but it has something to do with another Halloween-themed project Disney was working on that year—Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas—and Katzenberg finding himself in the awkward position of having to choose between keeping Bette Midler or Tim Burton happy.

For more behind-the-scenes stories about Hocus Pocus and other Disney films, be sure to check out Witches Run Amok by Shannon Carlin. It’s a fascinating read for any Disney fan!

And if you love hearing these kinds of behind-the-scenes stories about animation and film history, be sure to check out Fine Tooning with Drew Taylor, where Drew and I dive deep into all things movies, animation, and the creative decisions that shape the films we love. You can find us on your favorite podcast platforms or right here on JimHillMedia.com.

Continue Reading

Film & Movies

How Disney’s “Bambi” led to the creation of Smokey Bear

Published

on

When people talk about Disney’s “Bambi,” the scene that they typically cite as being the one from this 1942 film which then scarred them for life is – of course – the moment in this movie where Bambi’s mother gets shot by hunters.

Which is kind of ironic. Given that – if you watch this animated feature today – you’ll see that a lot of this ruined-my-childhood scene actually happens off-camera. I mean, you hear the rifle shot that takes down Bambi’s Mom. But you don’t actually see that Mama Deer get clipped.

Now for the scariest part of that movie that you actually see on-camera … Hands down, that has to be the forest fire sequence in “Bambi.” As the grown-up Bambi & his bride, Faline, desperately race through those woods, trying to find a path to safety as literally everything around them is ablaze … That sequence is literally nightmare fuel.

Source: Economist.com

Mind you, the artists at Walt Disney Animation Studios had lots of inspiration for the forest fire sequence in “Bambi.” You see, in a typical year, the United States experiences – due to either natural phenomenon like lightning strikes or human carelessness – 100 forest fires. Whereas in 1940 (i.e., the year that Disney Studios began working in earnest of a movie version of Felix Salten’s best-selling movie), America found itself battling a record 360 forest fires.

Which greatly concerned the U.S. Forest Service. But not for the reason you might think.

Protecting the Forest for World War II

I mean, yes. Sure. Officials over in the Agricultural Department (That’s the arm of the U.S. government that manages the Forest Service) were obviously concerned about the impact that this record number of forest fires in 1940 had had on citizens. Not to mention all of the wildlife habitat that was now lost.

But to be honest, what really concerned government officials was those hundreds of thousands of acres of raw timber that had been consumed by these blazes. You see, by 1940, the world was on the cusp of the next world war. A conflict that the U.S. would inevitably  be pulled into. And all that now-lost timber? It could have been used to fuel the U.S. war machine.

So with this in mind (and U.S. government officials now seeing an urgent need to preserve & protect this precious resource) … Which is why – in 1942 (just a few months after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor) – the U.S. Forest Service rolls out its first-ever forest fire prevention program.

Which – given that this was the early days of World War II – the slogan that the U.S. Forest Service initially chose for its forest fire prevention program is very in that era’s we’re-all-in-this-together / so-let’s-do-what-we-can-to-help-America’s war-effort esthetic – made a direct appeal to all those folks who were taking part in scrap metal drives: “Forest Defense is National Defense.”

Source: Northwestern

And the poster that the U.S. Forest Service had created to support this campaign? … Well, it was well-meaning as well.  It was done in the WPA style and showed men out in the forest, wielding shovels to ditch a ditch. They were trying to construct a fire break, which would then supposedly slow the forest fire that was directly behind them.

But the downside was … That “Forest Defense is National Defense” slogan – along with that poster which the U.S. Forest Service had created to support their new forest fire prevention program didn’t exactly capture America’s attention.

I mean, it was the War Years after all. A lot was going in the country at that time. But long story short: the U.S. Forest Service’s first attempt at launching a successful forest fire prevention program sank without a trace.

So what do you do in a situation like this? You regroup. You try something different.

Disney & Bambi to the Rescue

And within the U.S. government, the thinking now was “Well, what if we got a celebrity to serve as the spokesman for our new forest fire prevention program? Maybe that would then grab the public’s attention.”

The only problem was … Well, again, these are the War Years. And a lot of that era’s A-listers (people like Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable, even Mel Brooks) had already enlisted. So there weren’t really a lot of big-name celebrities to choose from.

But then some enterprising official at the U.S. Forest Service came up with an interesting idea. He supposedly said “Hey, have you seen that new Disney movie? You know, the one with the deer? That movie has a forest fire in it. Maybe we should go talk with Walt Disney? Maybe he has some ideas about how we can better capture the public’s attention when it comes to our new forest fire prevention program?”

And it turns Walt did have an idea. Which was to use this government initiative as a way to cross-promote Disney Studio’s latest full-length animated feature, “Bambi.” Which been first released to theaters in August of 1942.

So Walt had artists at Disney Studio work up a poster that featured the grown-up versions of Bambi the Deer, Thumper the Rabbit & Flower the Skunk. As this trio stood in some tall grasses, they looked imploring out at whoever was standing in front of this poster. Above them was a piece of text that read “Please Mister, Don’t Be Careless.” And below these three cartoon characters was an additional line that read “Prevent Forest Fires. Greater Danger Than Ever!”

Source: USDA

According to folks I’ve spoken with at Disney’s Corporate Archives, this “Bambi” -based promotional campaign for the U.S. Forest Service’s forest fire prevention campaign was a huge success. So much so that – as 1943 drew to a close – this division of the Department of Agriculture reportedly reached out to Walt to see if he’d be willing to let the U.S. Forest Service continue to use these cartoon characters to help raise the public’s awareness of fire safety.

Walt – for reasons known only to Mr. Disney – declined. Some have suggested that — because “Bambi” had actually lost money during its initial theatrical release in North America – that Walt was now looking to put that project behind him. And if there were posters plastered all over the place that then used the “Bambi” characters that then promoted the U.S.’s forest fire prevention efforts … Well, it would then be far harder for Mr. Disney to put this particular animated feature in the rear view mirror.

Introducing Smokey Bear

Long story short: Walt said “No” when it came to reusing the “Bambi” characters to promote the U.S. Forest Service’s forest fire prevention program. But given how successful the previous cartoon-based promotional campaign had been … Well, some enterprising employee at the Department of Agriculture reportedly said “Why don’t we come up with a cartoon character of our own?”

So – for the Summer of 1944 – the U.S. Forest Service (with the help of the Ad Council and the National Association of State Foresters) came up with a character to help promote the prevention of forest fires. And his name is Smokey Bear.

Now a lot of thought had gone into Smokey’s creation. Right from the get-go, it was decided that he would be an American black bear (NOT a brown bear or a grizzly). To make this character seem approachable, Smokey was outfitted with a ranger’s hat. He also wore a pair of blue jeans & carried a bucket.

As for his debut poster, Smokey was depicted as pouring water over a still-smoldering campfire. And below this cartoon character was printed Smokey’s initial catchphrase. Which was “Care will prevent 9 out of 10 forest fires!”

Source: NPR

Which makes me think that this slogan was written by the very advertising executive who wrote “Four out of five dentists recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum.”

Anyway … By the Summer of 1947, Smokey got a brand-new slogan. The one that he uses even today. Which is “Only YOU can prevent forest fires.”

The Real Smokey Bear

Now where this gets interesting is – in the Summer of 1950 – there was a terrible forest fire up in the Capitan Mountains of New Mexico. And over the course of this blaze, a bear cub climbed high up into a tree to try & escape those flames.

Firefighters were finally able to rescue that cub. But he was so badly injured in that fire that he was shipped off to the National Zoo in Washington, D.C. and nursed back to health. And since this bear really couldn’t be released back in the wild at this point, he was then put on exhibit.

And what does this bear’s keepers decide to call him? You guessed it: Smokey.

Source: USDA

And due to all the news coverage that this orphaned bear got, he eventually became the living symbol of the U.S. Forest Service’s forest fire prevention program. Which then meant that this particular Smokey Bear got hit with a ton of fan mail. So much so that the National Zoo in Washington D.C. wound up with its own Zip Code.

“Smokey the Bear” Hit Song

And on the heels of a really-for-real Smokey Bear taking up residence in our nation’s capital, Steve Nelson & Jack Rollins decide to write a song that shined a spotlight on this fire-fightin’ bruin. Here’s the opening stanza:

With a ranger’s hat and shovel and a pair of dungarees,
You will find him in the forest always sniffin’ at the breeze,
People stop and pay attention when he tells them to beware
Because everybody knows that he’s the fire-preventin’ bear

Believe or not, even with lyrics like these, “Smokey the Bear” briefly topped the Country charts in the Summer of 1950. Thanks to a version of this song that was recorded by Gene Autry, the Singing Cowboy.

By the way, it was this song that started all of the confusion in regards to Smokey Bear’s now. You see, Nelson & Rollins – because they need the lyrics of their song to scan properly – opted to call this fire-fightin’-bruin Smokey THE Bear. Rather than Smokey Bear. Which has been this cartoon character’s official name since the U.S. Forest Service first introduced him back in 1944.

“The Ballad of Smokey the Bear”

Further complicating this issue was “The Ballad of Smokey the Bear,” which was a stop-motion animated special that debuted on NBC in late November of 1966. Produced by Rankin-Bass as a follow-up to their hugely popular “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” (which premiered on the Peacock Network in December of 1964) … This hour-long TV show also put a “THE” in the middle of Smokey Bear’s name because the folks at Rankin-Bass thought his name sounded better that way.

And speaking of animation … Disney’s “Bambi” made a brief return to the promotional campaign for the U.S. Forest Service’s forest fire prevention program in the late 1980s. This was because the Company’s home entertainment division had decided to release this full-length animated feature on VHS.

What’s kind of interesting, though, is the language used on the “Bambi” poster is a wee different than the language that’s used on Smokey’s poster. It reads “Protect Our Forest Friends. Only You Can Prevent Wildfires.” NOT “Forest Fires.”

Anyway, that’s how Disney’s “Bambi” led to the creation of Smokey Bear. Thanks for bearin’ with me as I clawed my way through this grizzly tale.

Continue Reading

Trending