General

A rather theatrical edition of “Why For”

Jim Hill’s back with even more answers to your Disney-related questions. This time around, Jim continues to shine a spotlight on “Tarzan” ‘s sightline problems, talks about why Bruce Willis (and not Jim Carrey) is now the voice of R.J. the raccoon in Dreamworks’ “Over the Hedge” as well as revealing that a really-for-real stage version of “High School Musical” is currently in the works

Published

18 years ago

March 30, 2006

Jim Hill

First up, Leslie C. writes in to say:

Your “Tarzan” story on Monday must have really struck a nerve with Disney Theatrical. By Tuesday afternoon, Schumacher’s flunkies already had an article up on Playbill.com where they denied that “Tarzan” had any significant sightline issues. They also insisted that the box office staff at the Richard Rodgers had been completely straight with people about which seats in the orchestra section actually had obstructed views of the stage.

When Disney suits move this fast to cover their asses, you just know that you’ve shined a spotlight on a problem that they’d really prefer had been left in the dark.

So keep shining that spotlight, Jim. It’s stories like this that make me come by your website every morning.

Keep up the good work

Dear Leslie C.

Thanks for your kind note. And — yeah — I also saw that same piece over on Playbill.com. And I have to admit that I thought that it was pretty amusing to see Disney Theatrical execs moving this quickly to try & do some damage control. To try & convince theatre-goers that “Tarzan” really didn’t have any sightline problems.

And yet — right there in the middle of that March 29th article — you had David Schrader (I.E. Disney Theatrical’s managing director & chief financial officer) saying things like “There are 24 rows in the orchestra and we’re only talking about the last four” and “From the day tickets went on sale, the last four rows of the orchestra have been identified as obstructed view.”

Which is all well & good … Except for the fact that you have several generations of NYC theatre-goers who have been taught to think that the term “obstructed view” and/or “partial view” means … Well, that you’re going to have a pole somewhere in your field of vision or that your seat is so far to the left or the right that you won’t be able to see some of the action on stage. With the operative word here being “some.”

But in the case of “Tarzan,” “obstructed view” and “partial view” means something entirely different. What with all the flying that’s done in the first act of this show … Well, anyone who’s seated under the mezzanine may find themselves missing out on many of the key moments in this musical.

“How many key moments?,” you ask. Well, how would you feel if you bought a ticket to the Broadway version of “Tarzan” and — because your seat was in the “partial view” and/or “obstructed” section of the orchestra — you wound up not having a clear view of:

Tarzan’s parents’ escape from the shipwreck at the very start of the show
Tarzan’s parents’ gravity-defying arrival on shore
Their dramatic deaths at the hands … er … the claws of a leopard
Most of the aerial acrobatics that the gorillas do during their introductory scene in “Tarzan”
Most of Terk’s introductory scene in the show
A good portion of the shadow puppets that are presented during the “Son of Man” number
Adult Tarzan’s dramatic entrance into the show
Jane being trapped in the giant spider web
Tarzan’s subsequent rescue of Jane
Tarzan & Jane’s Act II exit

That sounds like a pretty significant portion of the show that you’d be missing out on, don’t you think? Which is why it’s a little maddening to read (as part of Tuesday’s Playbill.com piece) Schrader trying to be dismissive about “Tarzan” ‘s sightline problems, saying things like the ” … perception in your head is that you’re missing something more than you are because you can’t see it.”

And then there’s David’s claim that “… we’re only talking about the last four” rows of the orchestra being “partial view” or “obstructed view” seats. Well, that — as it turns out — is a pretty significant portion of the Richard Rodger’s total capacity.

Don’t believe me? Okay. Let’s run the numbers, then: According to NYTheatre.com, the Richard Rodger theatre has 1,368 seats. And the back four rows of this theatre (I.E. Rows U, V, W & X) have a total of 143 seats. Well, according to my math, that means that just over a 10th of the people who attend performances of “Tarzan” won’t really be able to enjoy a significant component of this show (I.E. The flying).

And then — when you take into consideration that this seating chart for the Richard Rodgers theatre clearly states that “Front Mezzanine Row A overhangs Orchestra Row J” … Well, that means that theatre-goers who are seated in the rows directly behind Row J (I.E. Rows K, N, L, O, P, Q, R & T) will also have their “Tarzan” viewing experience significantly impacted.

Continuing to run the numbers here: We have 369 significantly impacted seats in Rows K through T. Now if we fold those 369 significantly impacted seats in with those 143 “partial view” and/or “obstructed” seats … Well, you’re now talking about 512 seats. More than a third of the total capacity of the Richard Rodgers theatre.

“But don’t you think that you’re making far too much of this, Jim?,” you query. “Are New York theatre-goers really going to care that they can’t see every single moment in this new Disney musical?”

Well, all I can say in response to that is take a look at “Tarzan” ‘s playbill. More importantly, look at how Disney Theatrical Productions has chosen to promote its new musical.

Copyright Disney Enterprises LLC

The most prominent image on that “Tarzan” playbill is that of the Ape Man swinging on a vine. Which pretty much says to me that — if you buy a ticket to Disney’s new Broadway show — that you’re eventually supposed to see Tarzan arrive on stage via vine.

Unless — of course — you happen to be seated in that part of the orchestra that (thanks to that extremely low overhang at the Richard Rodgers theatre) doesn’t get to see a whole lot of the flying that’s done in this show. Which (as I just pointed out) could possibly amount to as much as a third of the people who attend every single performance of “Tarzan.”

Sooo … Do you really think that these people — after having paid good money for a seat at Disney’s brand-new Broadway show, only to miss out on most of this musical’s signature flying sequences — are then going to go home & talk up “Tarzan” to their friends & family?

This is why I think that “Tarzan” is soon going to have a serious word-of-mouth problem. Which is why I think that this musical’s production team has to move — and move fast — in order to mitigate this issue during the show’s preview period.

I mean, does Disney Theatrical really want another weekend of preview performances to go by where audience members can then go home and say “I missed out on a lot of ‘Tarzan” ‘s flying scenes because of where I was seated in the wrong part of the orchestra”? Is that really the message that the Mouse wants getting out about the company’s new musical? That the show’s sightlines (to quote one particularly opinionated New Yorker who attended this past Saturday night’s performance of “Tarzan”) “totally suck”?

Here’s hoping that director Bob Crowley and his “Tarzan” production team realize that a single Playbill.com article isn’t going to change the perception that their show has a serious sightline problem.

And if you guys think that I’m being mean or overly-dramatic here … Well, wait ’til you see what happens when the New York papers finally get wind of this problem. And they then begin to go after the Mouse for daring to mount a new musical in NYC. One where a good portion of the audience seated in the orchestra section can’t see the flying sequences in this show because of the awful sightlines at the Richard Rodgers theatre. Those stories are going to my pitiful little “Tarzan” -related pieces look like kindly Post-It notes.

Okay. That’s enough “Trashing the Camp” for today. Let’s now take a look at a letter from MattL Who writes in to ask:

Hi Jim

I was looking forward to “Over The Hedge” when Jim Carrey was announced as the raccoon. But a year ago Bruce Willis replaced him. What happened? Every time I see the trailer I can’t help but see Jim Carrey in that role…

Thnx

MattL

Dear Mattl

Boy, talk about your timing. Literally this past Monday morning, I got the chance to sit down with Tim Johnson (I.E. One of the two directors of this upcoming Dreamworks Animation release). And while the two of us were talking about the big screen version of Michael Fry & T Lewis’ comic strip, the subject of Jim Carrey being the original voice of R.J. the raccoon actually did come up.

To hear Tim tell the tale, the real reason that Jim went over the wall after working on “Over the Hedge” for a while was that … Well, Mr. Carrey? He’s something of a method actor. Meaning that Jim likes to portray just one character at a time. Also that Carrey likes to stay in character the entire time that he’s working on a particular motion picture (Which resulted in some very interesting stories coming off of the “Man on the Moon” set, let me tell you … ).

Anyway … According to Mr. Johnson, this was the approach that Mr. Carrey supposedly wanted to take while working on “Over the Hedge.” In that Jim wanted to get into R.J.’s mindset and then — over the course of a few weeks — record all of the raccoon’s dialogue. That way, he’d then be able to get his portion of this Dreamworks Animation project over & done with fairly quickly.

It was then that Mr. Johnson & his co-director, Karey Kirkpatrick, clued Mr. Carrey into the way that animated features are really made. That it usually takes three to four years to complete a single film. More importantly, that the actors who voice the lead characters often have to go back into the recording studio multiple times over the course of production. As individual lines are tweaked & rewritten, or entirely new scenes are suddenly folded into the picture.

Once he learned how animated films were actually made, Jim quickly realized that he wasn’t going to enjoy this process. That — given his own working methods — it was going to be far too difficult (if not impossible) for him to maintain a consistent vocal performance over the course of the entire production. Which is why Mr. Carrey then decided to politely bow out of the project.

Copyright Dreamworks Animation

Which (admittedly) left Tim & Karey in a bit of a lurch. Until Jeffrey Katzenberg supposedly suggested that they now go after Bruce Willis (Who had done such a wonderful job playing a lovable scoundrel back in his old “Moonlighting” days) as a possible new voice for R.J.

Willis eventually agreed to the gig (Where he proved be the perfect vocal foil for Gary Shandling ‘s overly cautious turtle). And as for the finished product … Well, that rolls out in theaters on May 19th.

Which — by the way — you should really make a point of seeing, folks.

Why For? Because “Over the Hedge” is honestly the most entertaining motion picture that Dreamworks Animation has ever turned out.

I mean, sure. This animation studio has produced some very funny films before (“Shrek” & “Shrek 2” immediately come to mind). But this is the first time (to my knowledge, anyway) that Dreamworks has actually gotten the mixture of humor & heart just right. Meaning that — even as you’re laughing at these characters — you’re also coming to care about R.J., Vern & Co.

Now this may sound like a very left-handed compliment. But — me personally — I think that “Over the Hedge” is the most Pixar-like film that Dreamworks Animation has ever produced. By that I mean: It’s a handsome looking movie that features lots of memorable characters as well as some really great animation. But — more importantly — it’s a movie that’s loaded with humor & heart. Which is why I am honestly over the moon about “Over the Hedge.” I just can’t wait to see this animated feature again.

And speaking of things that JHM readers should really check out … Here. Please take a minute and go click on this link. Which should take you straight over the Disney Channel’s home page.

For those of you who aren’t willing to click, who want absolutely nothing to do with today’s version of the Disney Channel … Well, here. I’ve included an image capture of that webpage that I took yesterday afternoon.

Notice anything unusual toward the center of this page?

If not … Well, I’ll let Jacob P.’s e-mail point the way:

I saw an ad on the disney channel website that you will be able to license HSM through Music Theater International in the fall. do you know any thing about this? Love the site!

Jacob P.

Dear Jacob:

Yeah, this sort of ties in directly with what I was writing about yesterday. About how the Walt Disney Company is (in every way that the corporation can possibly think of) trying to capitalize on the phenomenal success of this original Disney Channel TV movie.

So — as you can see by the application that I’ve also provided a screen capture of …

… — MTI is already accepting applications from theater groups around the United States who are interested in presenting an original stage adaptation of this incredibly popular TV movie.

Mind you, the libretto for this particular musical is still being written. But once it’s completed, Music Theatre International will then begin licensing the rights to the stage version of “High School Musical” through its …

… “Musicals from the Disney Collection” section.

Okay. I know. This new bit of information won’t convince the crumudgeons who post on JHM’s discussion boards (You know the ones that I’m talking about. The people who never forgave Disney Channel execs for taking “Vault Disney” off the air. Who insist that — because this cable channel no longer caters to baby boomers — it’s totally useless nowadays. Who refuse to acknowledge that — because of its new tween-friendly format — the Disney Channel has become one of the real ratings powerhouses in today’s cable industry) who insist that “High School Musical” is hardly worth mentioning.

Mind you, I don’t think that the staffs of USA Today and the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times would actually agree with that accessment. But you are — of course — entitled to your own opinion. (*koff, koff* Grouchy old bastid *koff*)

Well … Given that — with a single column — I’ve now managed to enrage both the management team at Disney Theatrical Productions as well as some of the surlier readers who regularly note on JHM’s discussion boards … Which is why I now think that it’s time that I called it a day.

You folks have a great weekend, okay? And don’t forget to turn your clocks ahead on Saturday night, alright?

See you all bright & early on Monday morning. Til then, take care, okay?

j

General

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

Published

8 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