General

A Grizz-ly edition of Why For

Last week’s “Why For” got such a strong response from WDWMagic.com readers that Jim Hill thought that he’d use this week’s edition to answer some of their queries. Plus can you help us identify this duck?

Published

20 years ago

October 21, 2004

Jim Hill

Today, we’re going to do a weird sort of edition of “Why For.” One that actually keys off of last week’s extremely controversial version of this same column.

“Why would you want to do something like, Jim?,” you ask. Because over the past seven days, I have gotten dozens of rather heated e-mails from Disneyana fans. People who really took me to task for suggesting that General Grizz’s “Save ‘The Land’ ” campaign was ill-advised.

Some people got right to the point. Like Robert S., who wrote in recently to say:

You jerk. How dare you attack General Grizz? I hope you die.

Which — you have to admit — gets right to the point. Still others — like Rachel R. — were much more polite, but still really upset with me:

Jim —

As a longtime reader of both JimHillMedia.com & WDWMagic.com, I was extremely disappointed to see that you used last week’s “Why For” column as a vehicle to attack General Grizz. Sure, some of the comments that he makes on the WDWMagic discussion boards can be over the top. But Grizz’s heart is really in the right place.

Whereas you, Jim … You seem intent on taking General Grizz’s campaign to save Epcot’s The Land pavilion and turning it into an opportunity to build yourself up by tearing Grizz down. Which is (to my way of thinking, anyway) a pretty shameful way to promote yourself & your website.

Shame on you, Jim. I thought that you were better than this.

*sigh*

It’s letters like these that make me realize that I must have done a really poor job of getting across the point that I was trying to make with last week’s “Why For” column. You see, the real intent of last Friday’s article WASN’T to personally attack General Grizz. But — rather — to talk about why WDI has real problems with certain types of Disney fans. People who are well intentioned but ultimately make life that much more difficult for the Imagineers.

How so? Well, let’s try looking at this whole “Save ‘The Land’ ” call-to-arms thing from Imagineering’s point of view. Here you have a division of the Walt Disney Company that just came through five hellish years. An arm of the Disney corporation that’s suffered through round after round of lay-offs, where virtually every project that WDI has proposed for construction in the stateside parks has had its budget cut to the bone time & time again.

But now — finally — Walt Disney Imagineering seems to have turned a corner. And wonder of wonders, the money spigot has been turned back on! Which is how a big budget project like “Soarin’ ” finally got approved for construction at Epcot in the first place. Plus — for the first time in years — Disney’s money guys have actually agreed to throw some extra dough in the pot to help spruce up “The Land” ‘s interior, upgrade the “Sunshine Season Food Court,” etc. Happy days are here again at WDI!

But then General Grizz starts his “We have to save ‘The Land’ ” campaign. And copies of his call-to-arms get circulated around Imagineering headquarters in Glendale and eventually get into the hands of WDI’s accountants. You know, the sharp pencil boys? Those guys with all the ledgers & the spreadsheets who are always fighting with the Imagineers about how much money they actually need to build various attractions?

Anyway … The accountants take one look at General Grizz’s letter and think “This is an opportunity. If we can just convince management that Disneyana fans really are upset about all the changes that the Imagineers want to make to ‘The Land’ ‘s interior, this could give us a chance to cut some serious coin out of the construction budget for this project.”

You see what I’m getting at, Rachel? General Grizz thought that he was doing the right thing by announcing his call-to-arms. But what he actually did (in this case, anyway) was helped Imagineering’s accountants. Giving these guys just the excuse that they were looking for in order to shave another couple of million dollars off of the proposed budget for this Future World revitalization project.

And — to make matters worse — you have to understand that the pavilions on this side of Epcot operate on a strict 10 year rehab schedule. Which means that what doesn’t get fixed this time around will then have to wait ’til 2014 to receive any additional attention.

So — thanks to a well-intended if somewhat mis-guided effort to save “The Land” ‘s interior — General Grizz and his co-horts may have actually done this Future World pavilion more harm than good. They may have accidentally created a situation where money will now get cut out of “the Land” ‘s rehab budget. Which may result in a version of this pavilion that actually looks worse than the “Transportation Center” that the Imagineers were originally planning on building.

Thankfully — as of this moment — the sharp pencil boys haven’t been all that successful in their effort to convince Disney management that “all those dweebs on the Net” (Their term. Not mine) want the interior of this Future World pavilion to remain just as it is now. But every day that General Grizz continues to push his case gives WDI’s accountants another opportunity to whittle away at this project.

As recently as this past Wednesday, I heard that copies of Grizz’s call-to-arms continue to circulate at Disney. With the accountants forwarding copies of the WDWMagic.com discussion boards that cover this particular subject to influential managers within the Team Disney Burbank building with attachments that read: “Have you heard about this? Maybe we’d better take another look at changing ‘The Land’ ‘s interior.”

So you see what’s really going on here, Rachel? The sharp pencil boys are using General Grizz’s “Save ‘The Land’ ” campaign to further their own agendas. NOT because these guys actually care about what Disneyana fans think. But — rather — because Grizz’s call-to-arms has given the accountants a convenient excuse to try & cut that project’s budget.

Now earlier this week, General Grizz and I exchanged a few e-mails. I made him aware of this situation within Walt Disney Imagineering. And he seemed genuinely surprised & concerned that his “Save ‘The Land’ ” campaign could have been turned into something might actually hurt this Future World pavilion. This is clearly not the outcome that the General was going for. Now as to whether this news will — in the future — effect the way Grizz announces his call-to-arms over at WDWMagic.com … Who can say?

I guess what I’m really saying here is that — from here on in — all us folks who work with the Web need to be a bit more careful about how we pick our battles. Make sure that — when we issue a call-to-arms — that we’re actually fighting for the right side.

After all, we don’t want to aid & abet WDI’s sworn enemy: The sharp pencil boys. The people who said “We don’t need to spend big bucks on the ‘Journey into Imagination’ rehab” and “It’s okay to shut down Disneyland’s ‘Country Bear’ show and replace it with a bargain basement version of WDW’s ‘Winnie the Pooh’ ride.”

Anyway … Out of all the notes that I received this past week, the following message from Travis Y. was probably the best written. As well as one of the most aggravating. And I’m not just saying that because this particular e-mail starts out with a quote from yours truly:

“Well, this is where I have to remind you guys that the Walt Disney Company is actually a business. And what you may view as a peaceful & tranquil environment to dine in, the execs who are running the Mouse House see as an area at Epcot that is severely underutilized. A section of Future World which is not pulling its weight.” 10-15-04

Dear Jim,

In several previous articles (though I cannot recall any specifically off the top of my head), in order to provide explanation for various decisions of the WDC, you’ve made a point of stating WDC is a business. Granted, WDC is a business and must do what makes sense as such. But on the other hand, I HATE the reality that the WDC puts business first. Walt would have changed The Land not because the space was underutilized, but because of why it was underutilized, i.e. — bad show.

Certainly I understand some of the changes from the bad show angle. As fond as I am of those balloons, I never understood how they fit in exactly, and I won’t really miss them when they float away. Also, from the space angle, I agree they’re gonna have to modify something to accomodate the new crowds. What bugs me is that damn business angle.

That’s my own problem I realize. Facts are facts, and the way you deal with them in life determines your success. But the more you write about the business arguement, the more irked I get, not just because I don’t like the facts themselves, but it’s as if you yourself are siding with them, excusing away some of their more controvertial considerations and decisions, all in the name of attendance increases and stuffed cash registers. I hate that.

Personally, I believe if they were thinking show — and not just show, but Walt’s show — they would do exactly what Grizz is talking about. Take the more expensive and unsound business route by retheming Soarin, not retheming the entire pavillion to match a Soarin’ clone. I love the intro to the AK segment on the latest WDW souvenier DVD — a sound clip of Walt talking about preserving nature. Walt would have loved The Land’s symbiosis theme circa ’82 or ’94 or whenever the heck they introduced it to the pavillion. Would they have to change the Food Fair to accomodate the new crowds? Of course. But a travel agency? Gimme a break.

The more I read your articles, the more I sense that while you love a good Walt Disney back story more than anyone, you place a different value on them than some of us. You don’t romanticize his way of thinking, his outdated 1950’s modernist ideals the way we do. As such, you are less concerned w/ how new decisions impact the original vision, looking instead to whether it works today as entertainment or not. You always wanted those Time Racers. I for one am glad they’re dead.

Will retheming Soarin’ draw less crowds than retheming the Pavillion? Perhaps. I like Soarin’ as it is, I’ve got the Jerry Goldsmith track on repeat in the computer. Shooting new footage for the ride will likely result in losing this music that is such a key to it’s current success. But I’m willing to take a chance. Change everything you want in The Land if it draws in crowds. Just don’t change the theme.

Travis Y.

Dear Travis:

Given that what you’ve written here is a basically polite, very respectful letter, I really feel like a jerk for saying something like this: But I’m not going to answer your e-mail, Travis. NOT because I don’t think that you bring up some valid points (Because you do). But — rather — because I have grown tired of Disneyana fans who invoke Walt’s name as part of their defense of Epcot.

“What do I mean by that?,” you ask. Well … Let’s take a look at these sentences from your e-mail: “Walt would have loved The Land’s symbiosis theme circa ’82 or ’94 …” and “… not just show, but Walt’s show.”

Quick question, Travis: Are you a member of the Disney family and thereby privvy to information that the rest of us don’t have? Or are you a member of the Psychic Friends Network and — as a result — able to channel messages from the Old Mousetro straight from the great beyond?

If none of the above in true, Travis … Then what gives you the right to pretend that you know what Walt Disney’s likes & dislikes might be?

Please don’t get me wrong, Travis. I don’t mean to single you out for doing this. Sort of like I didn’t mean to single out General Grizz last week for being the perfect example of the sort of Disney dweeb who blindly insists that nothing ever changes at the theme parks. (And look how that “Why For” answer came back and bit me in the ass.)

Anyway … I’m sorry if this seems like a very strange response to your e-mail. But — when people play the Walt card (particularly when they’re talking about projects that weren’t even in the talking stage while Disney was alive) — it always makes me a little bit crazy.

Why for? Because, to be blunt, I don’t think that there’s anyone left on the planet — short of Diane Disney Miller — could have predicted what Walt would do from one minute to the next. (I used to include Roy E. Disney in this group. But ever since Walt’s nephew began using DCA to beat up Michael Eisner [Which seems really hyocritical. Particularly given that — on this theme park’s opening day back in February 2001 — Roy told numerous members of the press that Walt would have loved California Adventure.] , I’ve pulled him off my list of definitive Disney authorities.)

Don’t believe me? Then talk with real Disney old timers like Bob Gurr, Alice Davis & Harrison “Buzz” Price. People who actually worked with Walt and were always genuinely surprised by the sorts of assignments that he’d give them … Like trying to find a way to build a bobsled ride that would work in sunny California, or designing 300+ distinctly different ethnic costumes for a UNICEF attraction, or finding out if it was financially feasible to build a Disney theme park indoors.

If these people (who knew Walt well) couldn’t predict what Disney was going to do from one minute to the next … Then how can you pretend that you know what Walt would have thought about the proposed Land redo?

Don’t get me wrong, Travis. I’m sure that you’re a very nice guy. More importantly, that you’ve read all of the Disney biographies as well as the company histories that are out there. You’ve also seen the man speak on various videos & DVDs. Maybe you’ve even spoken with a few veteran Disney Company employees and/or elderly Imagineers, people who actually worked with Walt & had day-to-day contact with the man. Which is why you now may feel that you have some sort of special insight into Walt Disney might say or do.

Well, Travis, I’ve done all that and then some. And you know what I’ve learned from my 30 years of studying Walt Disney’s life? That the man was unknowable. As in: Disney was a constant surprise to all those who knew him, worked with him and/or loved him.

That said, if I had to bet on which of the four Florida theme parks would upset Walt the most, I’d have to say that Epcot would seem to be the safest bet. After all, even when Disney was on his death bed at St. Joseph’s hospital in Burbank, he was still using the ceiling tiles of his hospital room to map out the exact layout of his Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

Which was supposed to have been a city, Travis. NOT a futuristically themed theme park.

Which is why I think that it’s … Well … wrong-headed to try & defend General Grizz’s call-to-arms with sentences like “Walt would have changed The Land not because the space was underutilized ...” When — truth be told — that Future World pavilion (And the entirety of Epcot Center, for that matter) is a much better reflection of the corporate mindset & artistic sensibilties of Card Walker (I.E. The man who was actually in charge of Walt Disney Productions when that theme park was initially designed & built) rather than of Walt himself.

But Disneyana fans (particularly those who love Epcot) don’t like to be reminded that Disney himself had so little to do with the creation of Epcot Center. That Walt was 10 years dead when all the really tough decisions were being made on this project. They’d prefer to cling to the myth that Walt Disney Productions’ publicity department created. That Epcot was Walt’s “last and best dream.”

Epcot the city, sure. Epcot Center, the theme park … Not by a long shot, Travis.

So how’s about this, Travis? You send me another e-mail that doesn’t include any lines like “Walt wouldn’t have done it that way” … And I promise that I’ll then answer your note, okay?

Send me a letter like that, Travis. THEN I’ll be happy to discuss my whole “The Walt Disney Company is a business” position with you, alright?

Okay. Now that I’m sure that I’ve offended dozens of WDWMagic.com readers, let me ask you folks a question. Particularly all you Donald Duck fans out there. What can you tell me about this duck?

My significant other — Nancy Stadler — recently received this Donald Duck from her Dad. Evidently, Mary (Nancy’s late mother) found this 4 1/2 inch tall plastic figure at a flea market in Georgia. And — since she knew that her daughter was a big-time duck collector — Mary set this Donald aside to send to Nancy later this year.

But — now that Mary’s gone — Nancy’s been trying to fill in a few of the blanks on this figurine. As in: Where exactly did it come from? And why is Donald Duck dressed in such strange garb? With a blue pin-striped shirt & cap, rather than his usual sailor suit & hat. Plus Donald appears to be wearing brown gloves. And while one glove appears to have fingers, the other (on the duck’s left hand) does not.

As for any additional identifying marks: On the back of this figure — in raised writing — are three words: ARCO, Disney & China.

So can any of you Donald Duck fans out there help me out here? Any info that you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Not to mention clearing up some of the questions that Nancy may have about this one last gift from her Mom.

That’s it for this week, folks. Here’s hoping that I haven’t upset too many people over at WDWMagic.com. If not … Well, I guess there’s next week.

Have a great weekend, okay? We’ll all talk again come Monday, alright?

jrh

General

Seward Johnson bronzes add a surreal, artistic touch to NYC’s Garment District

Published

9 years ago

June 23, 2015

Jim Hill

Greetings from NYC. Nancy and I drove down from New
Hampshire yesterday because we'll be checking out
Disney Consumer Products' annual Holiday Showcase later today.

Anyway … After checking into our hotel (i.e., The Paul.
Which is located down in NYC's NoMad district), we decided to grab some dinner.
Which is how we wound up at the Melt Shop.

Photo by Jim Hill

Which is this restaurant that only sells grilled cheese sandwiches.
This comfort food was delicious, but kind of on the heavy side.

Photo by Jim Hill

Which is why — given that it was a beautiful summer night
— we'd then try and walk off our meals. We started our stroll down by the Empire
State Building
…

Photo by Jim Hill

… and eventually wound up just below Times
Square (right behind where the Waterford Crystal Times Square New
Year's Eve Ball is kept).

Photo by Jim Hill

But you know what we discovered en route? Right in the heart
of Manhattan's Garment District
along Broadway between 36th and 41st? This incredibly cool series of life-like
and life-sized sculptures that Seward
Johnson has created.

Photo by Jim Hill

And — yes — that is Abraham Lincoln (who seems to have
slipped out of WDW's Hall of Presidents when no one was looking and is now
leading tourists around Times Square). These 18 painted
bronze pieces (which were just installed late this past Sunday night / early
Monday morning) range from the surreal to the all-too-real.

Photo by Jim Hill

Some of these pieces look like typical New Yorkers. Like the
business woman planning out her day …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the postman delivering the mail …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the hot dog vendor working at his cart …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the street musician playing for tourists …

Photo by Jim Hill

Not to mention the tourists themselves.

Photo by Jim Hill

But right alongside the bronze businessmen …

Photo by Jim Hill

… and the tired grandmother hauling her groceries home …

Photo by Jim Hill

… there were also statues representing people who were
from out-of-town …

Photo by Jim Hill

… or — for that matter — out-of-time.

Photo by Jim Hill

These were the Seward Johnson pieces that genuinely beguiled. Famous impressionist paintings brought to life in three dimensions.

Note the out-of-period water bottle that some tourist left
behind. Photo by Jim Hill

Some of them so lifelike that you actually had to pause for
a moment (especially as day gave way to night in the city) and say to yourself
"Is that one of the bronzes? Or just someone pretending to be one of these
bronzes?"

Mind you, for those of you who aren't big fans of the
impressionists …

Photo by Jim Hill

… there's also an array of American icons. Among them
Marilyn Monroe …

Photo by Jim Hill

… and that farmer couple from Grant Wood's "American
Gothic."

Photo by Jim Hill

But for those of you who know your NYC history, it's hard to
beat that piece which recreates Alfred Eisenstaedt's famous photograph of V-J Day in Times Square.

Photo by Jim Hill

By the way, a 25-foot-tall version of this particular Seward
Johnson piece ( which — FYI — is entitled "Embracing Peace") will actually
be placed in Times Square for a few days on or around August 14th to commemorate the 70th
anniversary of Victory Over Japan Day (V-J Day).

Photo by Jim Hill

By the way, if you'd like to check these Seward Johnson bronzes in
person (which — it should be noted — are part of the part of the Garment
District Alliance's new public art offering) — you'd best schedule a trip to
the City sometime over the next three months. For these pieces will only be on
display now through September 15th.

General

Wondering what you should “Boldly Go” see at the movies next year? The 2015 Licensing Expo offers you some clues

Published

9 years ago

June 10, 2015

Jim Hill

Greeting from the 2015 Licensing Expo, which is being held
at the Mandalay Bay
Convention Center in Las
Vegas.

Photo by Jim Hill

I have to admit that I enjoy covering the Licensing Expo.
Mostly becomes it allows bloggers & entertainment writers like myself to
get a peek over the horizon. Scope out some of the major motion pictures &
TV shows that today's vertically integrated entertainment conglomerates
(Remember when these companies used to be called movie studios?) will be
sending our way over the next two years or so.

Photo by Jim Hill

Take — for example — all of "The Secret Life of
Pets" banners that greeted Expo attendees as they made their way to the
show floor today. I actually got to see some footage from this new Illumination
Entertainment production (which will hit theaters on July 8, 2016) the last time I was in Vegas. Which
was for CinemaCon back in April. And the five or so minutes of film that I viewed
suggested that "The Secret Life of Pets" will be a really funny
animated feature.

Photo by Jim Hill

Mind you, Universal Pictures wanted to make sure that Expo
attendees remembered that there was another Illumination Entertainment production
coming-to-a-theater-near-them before "The Secret Life of Pets" (And
that's "Minions," the "Despicable Me" prequel. Which
premieres at the Annecy International Animated Film Festival next week but
won't be screened stateside 'til July 10th of this year). Which is why they had
three minions who were made entirely out of LEGOS loitering out in the lobby.

Photo by Jim Hill

And Warner Bros. — because they wanted "Batman v
Superman: Dawn of Justice" to start trending on Twitter today — brought
the Batmobile to Las Vegas.

Photo by Jim Hill

Not to mention full-sized macquettes of Batman, Superman and
Wonder Woman. Just so conventioneers could then see what these DC superheroes
would actually look like in this eagerly anticipated, March 25, 2016 release.

Photo by Jim Hill

That's the thing that can sometimes be a wee bit frustrating
about the Licensing Expo. It's all about delayed gratification. You'll come
around a corner and see this 100 foot-long ad for "The Peanuts Movie"
and think "Hey, that looks great. I want to see that Blue Sky Studios production
right now." It's only then that you notice the fine print and realize that
"The Peanuts Movie" doesn't actually open in theaters 'til November
6th of this year.

Photo by Jim Hill

And fan of Blue Sky's "Ice Age" film franchise are in for an even
longer wait. Given that the latest installment in that top grossing series
doesn't arrive in theaters 'til July
15, 2016.

Photo by Jim Hill

Of course, if you're one of those people who needs immediate
gratification when it comes to your entertainment, there was stuff like that to
be found at this year's Licensing Expo. Take — for example — how the WWE
booth was actually shaped like a wrestling ring. Which — I'm guessing — meant
that if the executives of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. didn't like
the offer that you were making, they were then allowed to toss you out over the
top rope, Royal Rumble-style.

Photo by Jim Hill

I also have to admit that — as a longtime Star Trek fan —
it was cool to see the enormous Starship Enterprise that hung in place over the
CBS booth. Not to mention getting a glimpse of the official Star Trek 50th
Anniversary logo.

Photo by Jim Hill

I was also pleased to see lots of activity in The Jim Henson
Company booth. Which suggests that JHC has actually finally carved out a
post-Muppets identity for itself.

Photo by Jim Hill

Likewise for all of us who were getting a little concerned
about DreamWorks Animation (what with all the layoffs & write-downs &
projects that were put into turnaround or outright cancelled last year), it was
nice to see that booth bustling.

Photo by Jim Hill

Every so often, you'd come across some people who were
promoting a movie that you weren't entirely sure that you actually wanted to
see (EX: "Angry Birds," which Sony Pictures Entertainment / Columbia
Pictures will be releasing to theaters on May 20, 2016). But then you remembered that Clay Kaytis —
who's this hugely talented former Walt Disney Animation Studios animator — is
riding herd on "Angry Birds" with Fergal Reilly. And you'd think
"Well, if Clay's working on 'Angry Birds,' I'm sure this animated feature
will turn out fine."

Photo by Jim Hill

Mind you, there were reminders at this year's Licensing Expo
of great animated features that we're never going to get to see now. I still
can't believe — especially after that brilliant proof-of-concept footage
popped up online last year — that Sony execs decided not to go forward
with production of Genndy Tartakovsky's
"Popeye" movie. But that's the
cruel thing about the entertainment business, folks. It will sometime break
your heart.

Photo by Jim Hill

And make no mistake about this. The Licensing Expo is all
about business. That point was clearly driven home at this year's show when —
as you walked through the doors of the Mandalay
Bay Convention Center
— the first thing that you saw was the Hasbros Booth. Which was this gleaming,
sleek two story-tall affair full of people who were negotiating deals &
signing contracts for all of the would-be summer blockbusters that have already
announced release dates for 2019 & beyond.

Photo by Jim Hill

"But what about The Walt Disney Company?," you
ask. "Weren't they represented on the show floor at this year's Licensing
Expo?" Not really, not. I mean, sure. There were a few companies there hyping
Disney-related products. Take — for example — the Disney Wikkeez people.

Photo by Jim Hill

I'm assuming that some Disney Consumer Products exec is
hoping that Wikkeez will eventually become the new Tsum Tsum. But to be blunt,
these little hard plastic figures don't seem to have the same huggable charm
that those stackable plush do. But I've been wrong before. So let's see what
happens with Disney Wikkeez once they start showing up on the shelves of the
Company's North American retail partners.

Photo by Jim Hill

And speaking of Disney's retail partners … They were
meeting with Mouse House executives behind closed doors one floor down from the
official show floor for this year's Licensing Expo.

Photo by Jim Hill

And the theme for this year's invitation-only Disney shindig? "Timeless
Stories" involving the Disney, Pixar, Marvel & Lucasfilm brands that
would then appeal to "tomorrow's consumer."

Photo by Jim Hill

And just to sort of hammer home the idea that Disney is no
longer the Company which cornered the market when it comes to little girls
(i.e., its Disney Princess and Disney Fairies franchises), check out this
wall-sized Star Wars-related image that DCP put up just outside of one of its
many private meeting rooms. "See?," this carefully crafted photo
screams. "It isn't just little boys who want to wield the Force. Little
girls also want to grow up and be Lords of the Sith."

Photo by Jim Hill

One final, kind-of-ironic note: According to this banner,
Paramount Pictures will be releasing a movie called "Amusement Park"
to theaters sometime in 2017.

Photo by Jim Hill

Well, given all the "Blackfish" -related issues
that have been dogged SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment over the past two years, I'm
just hoping that they'll still be in the amusement park business come 2017.

Your thoughts?

General

It takes more than three circles to craft a Classic version of Mickey Mouse

Published

9 years ago

June 9, 2015

Jim Hill

You know what Mickey Mouse looks like, right? Little guy,
big ears?

Truth be told, Disney's corporate symbol has a lot of
different looks. If Mickey's interacting with Guests at Disneyland
Park (especially this summer, when
the Happiest Place on Earth
is celebrating its 60th anniversary), he looks & dresses like this.

Or when he's appearing in one of those Emmy Award-winning shorts that Disney
Television Animation has produced (EX: "Bronco Busted," which debuts
on the Disney Channel tonight at 8 p.m. ET / PT), Mickey is drawn in a such a
way that he looks hip, cool, edgy & retro all at the same time.

Looking ahead to 2017 now, when Disney Junior rolls out "Mickey and the
Roadster Racers," this brand-new animated series will feature a sportier version
of Disney's corporate symbol. One that Mouse House managers hope will persuade
preschool boys to more fully embrace this now 86 year-old character.

That's what most people don't realize about the Mouse. The
Walt Disney Company deliberately tailors Mickey's look, even his style of
movement, depending on what sort of project / production he's appearing in.

Take — for example — Disney
California Adventure
Park's "World of Color:
Celebrate!" Because Disney's main mouse would be co-hosting this new
nighttime lagoon show with ace emcee Neil Patrick Harris, Eric Goldberg really had
to step up Mickey's game. Which is why this master Disney animator created
several minutes of all-new Mouse animation which then showed that Mickey was
just as skilled a showman as Neil was.

Better yet, let's take a look at what the folks at Avalanche Studios just went
through as they attempted to create a Classic version of Mickey & Minnie.
One that would then allow this popular pair to become part of Disney Infinity
3.0.

"I won't lie to you. We were under a lot of pressure to
get the look of this particular version of Mickey — he's called Red Pants
Mickey around here — just right," said Jeff Bunker, the VP of Art
Development at Avalanche Studios, during a recent phone interview. "When
we brought Sorcerer Mickey into Disney Infinity 1.0 back in January of 2014,
that one was relatively easy because … Well, everyone knows what Mickey Mouse
looked like when he appeared in 'Fantasia.' "

"But this time around, we were being asked to design
THE Mickey & Minnie," Bunker continued. "And given that these Classic
Disney characters have been around in various different forms for the better
part of the last century … Well, which look was the right look?"

Which is why Jeff and his team at Avalanche Studios began watching hours &
hours of Mickey Mouse shorts. As they tried to get a handle on which look would
work best for these characters in Disney Infinity 3.0.

"And we went all the way back to the very start of Mickey's career. We began
with 'Steamboat Willie' and then watched all of those black & white Mickey shorts
that Walt made back in the late 1920s & early 1930s. From there, we
transitioned to his Technicolor shorts. Which is when Mickey went from being
this pie-eyed, really feisty character to more of a well-behaved leading
man," Bunker recalled. "We then finished out our Mouse marathon by
watching all of those new Mickey shorts that Paul Rudish & his team have
been creating for Disney Television Animation. Those cartoons really recapture
a lot of the spirit and wild slapstick fun that Mickey's early, black &
white shorts had."

But given that the specific assignment that Avalanche Studios had been handed
was to create the most appealing looking, likeable version of Mickey Mouse
possible … In the end, Jeff and his team wound up borrowing bits & pieces
from a lot of different versions of the world's most famous mouse. So that
Classic Mickey would then look & move in a way that best fit the sort of
gameplay which people would soon be able to experience with Disney Infinity
3.0.

"That — in a lot of ways — was actually the toughest
part of the Classic Mickey design project. You have to remember that one of the
key creative conceits of Disney Infinity
is that all the characters which appear in this game are toys," Bunker
stated. "Okay. So they're beautifully detailed, highly stylized toy
versions of beloved Disney, Pixar, Marvel & Lucasfilm characters. But
they're still supposed to be toys. So our Classic versions of Mickey &
Minnie have the same sort of thickness & sturdiness to them that toys have.
So that they'll then be able to fit right in with all of the rest of the
characters that Avalanche Studios had previously designed for Disney Infinity."

And then there was the matter of coming up with just the
right pose for Classic Mickey & Minnie. Which — to hear Jeff tell the
story — involved input from a lot of Disney upper management.

"Everyone within the Company seemed to have an opinion
about how Mickey & Minnie should be posed. More to the point, if you Google
Mickey, you then discover that there are literally thousands of poses out there
for these two. Though — truth be told — a lot of those kind of play off the
way Mickey poses when he's being Disney's corporate symbol," Bunker said.
"But what I was most concerned about was that Mickey's pose had to work
with Minnie's pose. Because we were bringing the Classic versions of these
characters up into Disney Infinity 3.0 at the exact same time. And we wanted to
make sure — especially for those fans who like to put their Disney Infinity
figures on display — that Mickey's pose would then complement Minnie.

Which is why Jeff & the crew at Avalanche Studios
decided — when it came to Classic Mickey & Minnie's pose — that they
should go all the way back to the beginning. Which is why these two Disney icons
are sculpted in such a way that it almost seems as though you're witnessing the
very first time Mickey set eyes on Minnie.

"And what was really great about that was — as soon as
we began showing people within the Company this pose — everyone at Disney
quickly got on board with the idea. I mean, the Classic Mickey that we sculpted
for Disney Infinity 3.0 is clearly a very playful, spunky character. But at the
same time, he's obviously got eyes for Minnie," Bunker concluded. "So
in the end, we were able to come up with Classic versions of these characters
that will work well within the creative confines of Disney Infinity 3.0 but at
the same time please those Disney fans who just collect these figures because
they like the way the Disney Infinity characters look."

So now that this particular design project is over, does
Jeff regret that Mouse House upper management was so hands-on when it came to
making sure that the Classic versions of Mickey & Minnie were specifically
tailored to fit the look & style of gameplay found in Disney Infinity 3.0?

"To be blunt, we go through this every time we add a new character to the
game. The folks at Lucasfilm were just as hands-on when we were designing the
versions of Darth Vader and Yoda that will also soon be appearing in Disney
Infinity 3.0," Bunker laughed. "So in the end, if the character's
creators AND the fans are happy, then I'm happy."

This article was originally posted on the Huffington Post's Entertainment page on Tuesday, June 9, 2015