First up, Michael (a hardcore Roger Rabbit fan if ever there was one) sent me an e-mail to ask:
Dear Jim,
This year is the 15th Anniversary of “Who Framed Roger Rabbit.” I have read your articles (about how there was supposed to) going to be a Roger Rabbit type land at MGM but (because of monetary issues, that project) was scrapped. But do you think now — 15 years later — it is too late? (That we’re never going to) see a Roger Rabbit type ride at Walt Disney World?
P-P-Please,
Michael
D-d-dear Michael:
I have found — when it comes to the Mouse — that it’s wise never to say never. After all, Disneyland didn’t get its “Pinocchio’s Daring Journey” ride ’til May 1983. And that was 43 years after Disney’s animated version of Carlo Collodi’s classic tale first appeared in theaters. So — if you’re really a hard core Roger Rabbit fan, Michael — it’s probably best to take the long view here. To understand that some real patience may be in order.
After all, the copyright on the Roger Rabbit characters is co-owned by two different corporations: The Walt Disney Company and Amblin Entertainment. This means that — before any new Roger Rabbit project (be it a new movie, a video game, a ceramic statue or collectible pin) can officially go into production — that both sets of owners have to agree on how Roger & Co. are to used used. And given that Disney’s CEO Michael Eisner and Amblin’s chief honcho Steven Spielberg haven’t seen eye to eye about anything since Spielberg joined forces with former-Disney-Studio-head Jeffrey Katzenberg in October 1994 to form Dreamworks SKG … well, Michael. Can you see now why some real patience may be in order?
Now don’t lose all hope, pal. Perhaps after Michael Eisner finally steps down from his all-powerful position as head of the Walt Disney Company, MAYBE then Steven Spielberg will look more favorably on allowing some more Roger Rabbit projects to go into productions. And — were that to happen — well, maybe then MGM would finally get that new Roger Rabbit ride that you were asking about.
But — for now — all of those Roger Rabbit characters (I.E. Roger Rabbit, Jessica Rabbit, Baby Herman, Benny the Cab et al) are in the deep freeze. How deep in the deep freeze? For over 5 years now, WDI management has been telling the Imagineers to “… not even bother pitching any Roger Rabbit-themed rides, shows and attractions for the parks. After all, Spielberg’s not through with screwing with Eisner yet. Steven’s never going to allow any new Roger Rabbit projects to go through. Not as along as Michael’s in charge of Disney.”
I know that sounds like a really grim prognosis, Michael. But the upside is … Michael Eisner’s not always going to be charge of the Walt Disney Company forever. In fact, I’ve heard talk recently that Eisner could be out of a job as early as the Fall of 2006. (JHM will be doing some in-depth reporting about this matter next Tuesday. So be sure to drop by JHM on September 2nd. When we’ll be discussing the Post-Eisner Era. Anyway …)
So hang in there, Michael. 25, 30 years from now … who knows? You may finally get that Roger Rabbit ride at Disney-MGM after all. So patience, pal, patience.
I mean, think about how long the Pinocchio fans had to wait for THEIR ride, okay?
Next, James writes in to ask:
Hello Jim,
What’s the deal with the “Applecore… Baltimore. Who’s your friend?” joke from the “Donald Applecore” short? I vaguely remember what happens, but I don’t understand the joke. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!
James
Dear James:
You know, I once wondered about this particular gag myself. I mean, it sounds legit. Like it’s actually based on some ancient schoolyard prank. The whole “Applecore … Baltimore … Who’s your friend? … Me!” thing. Followed by the flinging of the applecore at your buddy’s head.
But when I asked veteran Disney animator Bill Justice about this “Applecore … Baltimore” stuff, he insisted that it was actually an original bit of business. Something that Bill and the other gagmen invented wholly on their own while they were working with director Jack Hannah on this January 1952 Disney short.
But given that Mr. Justice was fairly up there in years when we discussed this whole “Applecore … Baltimore” matter, I couldn’t help but think: Maybe Bill’s not remembering this correctly. Perhaps this routine actually is based on some schoolyard rhyme that Disney’s gagmen “borrowed.” Or maybe it’s some old bit from vaudeville that they’re paying tribute to.
So help me (and James as well) out here, people. Do any of you JimHillMedia.com readers have any definitive information of this old “Applecore … Baltimore” routine. Whether in fact it was something that Disney’s animators actually invented or whether this bit was something remembered from days gone by. Any and all information would be appreciated.
And speaking of additional information, Artie write in to ask:
Dear Jim,
What’s going on with the Wuzzles? They are a Disney (owned) property, correct? The reason I ask is because I’ve seen (walk-around versions of these characters) popping up in places that I wouldn’t expect them to be.
For instance, in the film “The Sweetest Thing” (not a Disney owned film) starring Cameron Diaz, a guy in an Eleroo costume proceeds to engage in a “physical relationship” with Selma Blair’s character. Now granted, it was a knock-off costume, as you’d never see a Disney character costume doing “that” on screen. But it was Eleroo down to the last detail.
On top of that, over the past few years, I’ve spotted what looked like a costumed Bumble-lion, on more than one occasion. Doing magazine and televised adds for a car company, and — if I’m not mistaken — some type of sports something-or-another. Again, (it’s) probably a knock-off costume, but way too close for Disney not to react. So what’s the deal?
-Artie
Artie –
You know, this one’s got me puzzled as well. I too have noticed that walk-around versions of the Wuzzles character costumes have been popping up in the oddest places. I recall seeing someone in a Bumblelion costume wandering through a music video on MTV not too long ago.
So what’s the deal here? Did someone in the Zoo Crew take home an Eleroo and a Bumblelion costume back in the early 1980s and forget to return it? Well … I don’t think so, Artie. Why for? Because I just called a friend who works in Disneyland’s character department (You know? The folks who actually design and manufacture all of those walk-around character costumes for the parks) and he went through that department’s records. And — near as my pal can figure — there never were any Wuzzle walk-around character costumes produced for the Disney theme parks.
Which — given that “The Wuzzles” wasn’t exactly a screaming success when this Disney animated series initially debuted on CBS back in September 1985 — I guess it’s easy to understand why no walk-around costumes for these characters were ever created. I mean, that show crashed and burned after only 13 episodes. It was hopelessly overshadowed by the other strictly-for-network-television animated series that Disney rolled out in the Fall of 1985, “Disney’s Adventures of the Gummy Bears.”
Which means (I guess) that those Wuzzle costumes that you and I have been seeing on TV recently, Artie, must be knock-off. Something that some Furry with a lot of scratch had put together.
And yet …
You see, I’m not entirely ready to sign off on this explanation because … well … I don’t think that “Disney’s Wuzzles” was quite the failure that I remember it being. I mean, if you were to go over to eBay right now, there’s two whole pages of Wuzzle related merchandise currently up for bid. Things like cute little plush versions of the characters from Hasbro to original animation cels to cake pans.
Plus — if I’m remembering correctly — “The Wuzzles” ran for one year (September 14, 1985 – September 9, 1986) on CBS. Then the same 13 episodes were rerun (and rerun and rerun …) by ABC for most of the next season (September 13, 1986 – May 16, 1987). After that, I’m fairly certain that the show ran on the Disney Channel for a number of years.
So “The Wuzzles” were characters that — while (admittedly) they weren’t nearly as popular as Disney’s Gummy Bears — still had a lot of exposure. And — given that it was Michael Eisner himself who reportedly ordered that these first two Disney animated TV series be put into production — it just stands to reason that there must have been one or two “Wuzzle” character costumes created for the parks.
Tell you what, folks. Let me call my friend at Disneyland’s Character Dept back. I’ll have him check some alternate spellings for Eleroo and/or Bumblelion. Just in case this info has been misfiled.
In the meantime, do any of you recall seeing a walk-around version of Eleroo or Bumblelion while you were visiting Disney’s theme parks in the mid-to-late 1980s or early 1990s? Better yet, would any of you have a photograph of these particular costumes? So that we could compare these outfits to the ones that appear in “The Sweetest Thing” and that MTV video?
I’m fairly certain that I’m right about those “Wuzzle” costumes that Artie and I have seen are knock-offs. But — given that we’ve just started up the “Jim, You Ignorant ***!” section here at JimHillMedia.com — I’d rather be right than have to print a retraction a week or so from now. So — if you folks could help out here — I’d really appreciate it.
And — speaking of JHM readers helping out — here’s a note from Robert S. that sheds some additional light on the Rhine River ride controversy:
Hey there, Jim.
Way back in May, you had a couple small articles in your “Why For” column about the Rhine River attraction that never got built. And there was discussion about the fabled “big wooden doors at the back of the attraction”. Well, I visited WDW in early June, and thought I’d swing by there and take a look.
Anyway … As you approach the back of the Germany pavilion, there are two large arches. The left one leads to the Oktoberfest restaurant. The right one contains a small sitting area for the Sommerfest quick-service food stand.
Aha! This is where I noticed something. In fact, in going back to re-read the May article, the quote referred to the wooden doors as being at the back of the Sommerfest seating area. Well, at the back of the seating area is just a wall with a nice mural painted on it.
But, if you look *up*, you realize that this wall is really a filled-in archway. Where the mural is, the wall is set in about 6-8 inches, and you can see the detail at the top of the arch. My guess is that there *used* to be doors there, but at some point they decided that the attraction would never be built, and they removed the doors and just walled it up.
I took a picture from the *outside* of the whole double-arch entrance, but didn’t get a close-up of the mural archway. But, I attached the photo anyway. I’ve lightened it up a bit so you can see inside better.
[ Click to view larger version ]
If you look closely, you can see the mural and the archway over it on the right side. Looking to the left, you can see the corresponding archway on that side, and how it continues through to the restaurant entrance. This would be the logical way the right-side attraction entrance would be laid out. I have a feeling that Sommerfest was only ever supposed to be a walk-up stand with no seating area, or perhaps not there at all, and was added when they didn’t put in the attraction. It does seem very shoe-horned in. Lastly, I should have looked to see if there was an obvious attraction exit, whether near the restaurant side, or perhaps through one of the stores.
Anyway, I hope this helps with the debate.
-Rob S.
Thanks for the excellent photo and report, Robert. As this particular edition of “Why For” proves, we love it when JHM readers can come forward and help us answer particularly vexing questions.
Anyway … that’s it for this week, folks. I hope you all have a great Labor Day.
FYI: Just a quick programming note. Though Parts VII and VIII of Jim Korkis’ great “History of Comic Books” will run on Saturday and Sunday respectively, we won’t be updating JimHillMedia.com on Monday. David Gasior and I decided to give the crew at JHM a bit of break.
But make sure to come back on Tuesday, September 2nd … when we’ll have a sure-to-be-controversial story up at the site, “The Post-Eisner Era.”
’til then … Well, you folks have a nice, restful three day weekend, okay?
jrh