General
Why For?
As Jim Hill wings his way out to Southern California, he still finds the time to answer some of your more obscure Disney-related questions.
Greetings from Seat 21A – United Flight 211. Currently cruising at 28,000 feet.
As I mentioned at the tail end of yesterday’s column, I’m currently en route to Southern California. Winging my way west so that I can be on hand when my darling daughter, Alice, turns the big 1-0 minus 1.
I won’t lie to you folks. Being a long distance daddy sucks. It’s a life that’s made up of too few hugs and too many phone calls. As well as lots and lots of plane trips like this. Flying solo to Southern California so that I can get some significant face time with Alice.
FYI: For those of you who may be wondering, this IS a really interesting time to be traveling. Pre-war jitters seem to have put any awful lot of people off the idea of flying. My flight from Manchester down to Washington D.C. as well as the leg from D.C. out to S.D. was extremely under-populated. Which meant that there was plenty of room to spread out on the plane (which is a good thing). Even though the 5-hour-plus trip out west did get a trifle lonely.
Anywho … one of the advantages of flying on United is that the plane’s on-board audio programming features a Walt Disney Records channel. This time around, I was able to preview the soundtrack for “Piglet’s Big Adventure” which is due out in theaters on March 21st. What’s kind of unusual about the latest “Winnie the Pooh” feature (which was actually produced by the folks over at Disney Television animation, not the crew at Disney Feature Animation) is that it features Carly Simon. The ’70s era songstress reportedly wrote and performed several new songs for “Piglet’s Big Movie,” in addition to performing the classic Sherman Brothers “Winnie the Pooh” song.
Mind you, the “Piglet’s Big Movie” soundtrack doesn’t actually go on sale ’til March 18th. But — based on what I was able to able to preview on the plane today — Carly does an okay job with the classic Sherman Bros. tune. As for the rest of the film’s score … well, truth be told, I only got to hear just one new Simon song: “With a Few Good Friends,” the tune that Carly wrote to underscore the moment in the movie where Pooh and pals build a new house for Eeyore. It seemed nice enough. Sweet. Simple. Though — given that I’ve already forgotten what “With a Few Good Friends” sounded like — I guess that I can’t say that the song was all that memorable.
Now the audio programming has slide into a section that features highlights from the soundtrack of “Jungle Book 2” … “What highlights?,” I hear all you cheapquel haters saying.
Look, I agree that it’s unfortunate that the Walt Disney Company now feels that it has to undercut its own artistic legacy by producing all of these unnecessary sequels to the studio’s animated classics. (Coming soon to a theater near you: “Bambi II.” Seriously, folks. I sh*t you not!)
That said, I am really getting tired of seeing all these alleged animation fans going out of their way to bash the artists who actually work on these movies. Sure, the stories for these projects aren’t what they should be. But the actual animation that’s being done on these video premieres — particularly the stuff that’s being done by Walt Disney Television Animation – Australia — is very good. Almost as good, in fact, as the stuff WDFA was doing back in the mid-tolate-1980s with “The Great Mouse Detective” and “Oliver & Company.”
This uptick in animation quality may explain why WDFA execs are reportedly toying with the idea of giving the Mouse’s Down Under Crew its very own really-for-real animated feature. Not another direct-to-video “Lion King” sequel (Though — that said — I have been hearing that the Aussies did a really nice job with “Lion King III,” which is due to hit store shelves sometime later this Fall), but an actual film of their very own to produce.
Sort of similar to what happened with Disney’s Paris studio. When that group of animators did such a nice job with “The Goofy Movie” that they were given a shot at the big leagues with “Tarzan.” Of course, the exemplary work that Disney’s French animators did on that 1999 feature didn’t stop WDFA execs from eventually shuttering their Parisian satellite.
Maybe Disney’s Australian animators better keep that in mind before they begin celebrating their coming promotion to the big show. When it comes to the Mouse these days, it’s important to remember that no good deed goes unpunished.
Radically changing the subject here … the Walt Disney Records audio programming of United Airlines’ Channel 12 has now segued into a series of songs from a soon-to-be-released recording, “O Mickey, Where Art Thou? : The Voices of Bluegrass Sing the Best of Disney.” Given the CD’s title, is it really a surprise to hear that this album is sort of a riff on the best selling “O Brother, Where Art Thou?” soundtrack?
But you want to hear the really funny part of the story, kids? “O Mickey, Where Art Thou?” ain’t half bad. Songs like “Circle of Life,” “You’ll Be In My Heart,” “Baby Mine” and “When She Loved Me” are rendered simply and sweetly with banjo, guitar and fiddle. More to the point, Disney’s recruited some of country’s top talents to warble these classic tunes. Folks like Ronnie Milsap, Sonya Issacs and Collin Raye provide inspired vocals for this recording.
In fact, I’m enjoying “O Mickey, Where Art Thou?” that I’d go and pick a copy of this recording right now … if it weren’t for two small things:
1. I’m currently flying at 40,000 feet.
2. “O Mickey, Where Art Thou?” doesn’t actually go on sale ’til April 1st.
Okay, enough with the self indulgent “Look at me! I’m writing a column while I’m flying in an airplane” crap. Let’s finally get around to this week’s “Why For?” shall we?
First up, Roger has a question that relates to “Spy Kids 2”:
Dear Jim,
I just listened to Robert Rodriguez’ fascinating commentary on the “Spy Kids 2” DVD, and was very interested to learn that he originally planned to shoot the opening sequence at Disneyland. When he asked about it, though, he was told that Disney doesn’t allow any movies to be shot at Disneyland, not even their own (which SK2 is, indirectly). His main regret was losing one of his jokes (Carmen was to have said “I’m tired of these Mickey Mouse assignments,” while tossing off her Mouse ears. Instead of [saying] “rinky dink” while tossing off her propeller head cap). But it did allow (Rodriguez) to come up with whacked rides that ended up in the film.
I’m curious, though, especially after reading your “Khrushchev at Disneyland” article. How come Disney won’t let movies (be filmed) in their theme parks.
Thanks,
Roger
Wait a minute. Rodriguez was actually told that Disney doesn’t allow movies to be shot in their theme parks? By who?
The reason I sound surprised is that I know of at least three motion pictures that have been shot at a Disney theme park. The most recent one — “Marvin’s Room” — was actually shot in WDW’s Magic Kingdom in 1997. By Miramax Pictures, the parent company of Dimension Films, the studio that actually produced Robert Rodriguez’s latest “Spy Kids” opus, “The Island of Lost Dreams.”
And the Disney World section of this Jerry Zacks film wasn’t just a throwaway, Roger. Miramax flew the film’s stars — Meryl Streep, Diane Keaton and Leonardo Dicaprio — down to Orlando. The “Marvin’s Room” production team spent several days filming in the Magic Kingdom. Including a scene where Diane Keaton faints and is rescued by a WDW cast member dressed as Goofy.
And Disneyland — the very park that Rodriguez reportedly wanted to shoot “Spy Kids 2″‘s opening sequence in — that theme park has also been as a key setting for a major motion picture in the not-so-distant past. By a non-Disney studio, no less.
Back in 1995, the Walt Disney Company gave 20th century Fox permission to come into the Park and shoot a sequence for “That Thing You Do” in and around the Matterhorn. This film (which Academy Award winner Tom Hanks made his directorial debut on, by the way) featured a sub-plot where a musician (Giovanni Ribisi) who was about to make his network television debut. But — once he was out in Hollywood — Disneyland’s siren song proved to be too much for the musician. Which is why Ribisi’s character ditched rehearsal and made his way out to Anaheim … where he ended up sharing a bobsled with a Disneyland cast member dressed as Mickey Mouse.
You see what I’m saying here, Robert? Each of these films had key sequences that were shot right inside a Disney theme park. With scenes that featured central players interacting with the Disney characters. Yet the Walt Disney Company supposedly suddenly said “No” when Robert Rodriguez came calling. A guy who had just directed a big hit picture for the corporation. Something doesn’t seem quite right about this story.
Truth be told, the Walt Disney Company has been allowing various film production companies to come into its theme parks for over 40 years now. Oh, sure. The Mouse can be pretty particular about who they allow on property with motion picture camera. (I’ve heard that Walt personally turned down offers from 20 different producers before he finally allowed a film to be shot inside of Disneyland. That movie — by the way — was a 1962 Universal Pictures release. “40 Pounds of Trouble,” starring Tony Curtis and Susan Pleshette.
I suspect that the real reason that Disney turned down Rodriguez when he went to the Mouse, seeking permission to shoot “Sky Kids 2″‘s opening sequence at Disneyland, had more to do with the film’s script. You recall that the scene that we’re actually talking about here, Roger, had the President’s daughter deliberately sabotaging an attraction at “Troublemaker” theme park. So that the ride would malfunction and her daddy — the President of the United States — would have to come rescue her.
On the heels on those extremely high profile accidents involving Disneyland guests who were injured while riding “Roger Rabbit’s Car Toon Spin” and/or while waiting to board the “Columbia,” I would imagine that the Mouse wasn’t all that eager to have the Grand Dame of the corporation’s theme park chain portrayed as a place where a little girl could easily circumvent all of Disneyland’s safety protocols. Which is why (I’m guessing here) Mickey opted to politely turn down Robert’s request to shoot “Spy Kids 2” on location in Anaheim.
Of course, the really ironic part of this whole story is that — in the not-so-distant future — Disneyland may actually have a “Spy Kids” themed attraction. I’ve recently heard from several WDI insiders that the Mouse is giving some very serious thought to using the 3D sequence that serves as the centerpiece of “Spy Kids 3” (which is currently shooting in Texas, by the way) as the leaping off point for a new 3D attraction for the company’s theme parks.
So Rodriguez may not have been able to shoot his movie inside Disneyland. But — in the not-so-distant future — Robert may find himself working closely with WDI to create an all-new “Spy Kids” film that can only be seen inside of the Anaheim theme park.
Funny how life works out sometime, isn’t it?
Next up is an e-mail from … Dang, I can’t read the name. (The turbulence on today’s flight has been something fierce. So much so that my glass of water just up-ended into my briefcase. Which caused the type to run on some of the print-outs I brought along on this trip.)
So let’s just say that this is a letter from Mr. A. Nonymous, who writes to ask:
Hi There Jim:
Ok, a poser for you. Do you have any info on possible alternative Fantasyland rides planned for WDW in the 1970s. I heard once that (the Imaginers) were thinking of new rides before they decided to just build duplicates of DL faves. I never heard any confirmation of this …
… and then the rest of this e-mail is just one blurry blob.
Sorry, whomever. Let me see if I can try and answer Mr. A. Nonymous’s question.
To the best of my recollection, the Imagineers really had hoped to put three brand new dark rides into Fantasyland at WDW’s Magic Kingdom. These would have been:
A “Sleeping Beauty” dark ride. This was supposed to have been the Florida theme park’s “Pretty Princess” ride — something similar to Disneyland’s “Snow White’s Scary Adventure.” In that it was supposed to have started out fairly sweetly with Princess Aurora dancing around with her forest friends and then ended fairly intensely … with several encounters with an increasingly scary Malificent. The next-to-last room of the ride was to have show Prince Phillip triumphing in battle with an enormous Malilicent-as-a-dragn AA figure. Followed by the obligatory “… And They Lived Happily Ever After” scene where Prince Phillip and Princess Aurora dance on their wedding day.
The “Mary Poppins” ride. This was supposed to have been WDW’s “Magical” ride. Similar in feel and effect to Disneyland’s “Peter Pan Flight.” Though — instead of boarding a miniature Spanish Galleon and flying off to Neverland — guests were supposed to have climbed into giant up-ended umbrellas (4 guest per umbrella). Then these WDW visitors were supposed to have been whisked through several three dimensional recreations of memorable moments from the 1964 Academy Award winning film.
Among the scenes that were supposed to have been in this proposed Disney World attraction was the film’s pop-into-a-chalk-painting sequence, tea at Uncle Albert’s as well as Mary’s memorable arrival at Cherry Tree Lane.
And finally, Disney World was also supposed to have gotten a “Legend of Sleepy Hollow” ride. This was to have been WDW’s scary / thrilling kiddie ride. Similar to Disneyland’s “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride.” Guests were supposed to have boarded giant hollowed pumpkins for a trip through the gloomy forest that the Headless Horseman haunted. WDW visitors were supposed to have had several close encounters with this grisly ghoul as their pumpkin twisted and turned its way through this weird wood.
The finale of WDW’s proposed “Legend of Sleepy Hollow” was supposed to have been particularly thrilling. With the Headless Horseman’s black stallion rearing up, threatening to slash Disney World visitors with its hooves, as the fearsome fiend fired a flaming jack-o-lantern right at their heads.
So why didn’t any of these cool new rides ever get installed in Florida’s Fantasyland. I’m sure that this will come as no surprise to regular readers of this website, but (All together now! With feeling!) Disney Company execs ultimately decided that this particular project cost too much. Which is that they decided to cut the budget.
The Disney World resort had originally been budgeted for $100 million. By the time October 1, 1971 rolled around, Walt Disney Productions had poured $400 million into the project. So, in a desperate attempt to get WDW’s spiraling construction costs under control, Roy O. Disney told the Imagineers to forget about doing something new for WDW’s Fantasyland and just go with what Disneyland already had.
Of course, the Imagineers being the quality conscious bunch of guys that they are, they couldn’t just go ahead with recycling the same old shows that had been done for Disneyland’s Fantasyland back in 1955. So even though WDW’s Magic Kingdom DID end up with a “Snow White” ride, a “Mr. Toad” and a “Peter Pan Flight,” these were NOT cloned attractions. If anything, WED / WDI rethought and restaged each of these classic Disney dark rides … with an eye toward doing everything they could to improve the original attraction.
So — in a way — WDW’s Magic Kingdom did end up with some all-new rides for its Fantasyland area. But — instead of being really original (like those proposed “Sleeping Beauty,” “Mary Poppins” and “Legend of Sleepy Hollow” rides that the Imagineers had really wanted to build) — they were radically reworked versions of those Disneyland favorites: “Snow White’s Scary Adventure,” “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride” and the “Peter Pan Flight.”
I hope this answers your question, Mr. whoever-you-are. Please drop me a note so that I can give you proper credit for the interesting question you came up with.
Finally, Peter H. writes in to ask:
Jimbo:
I’m sure you’ve already heard about this, But Reuters is reporting that the Walt Disney Company is making another bid for the Jim Henson Company.
This time around, the Mouse is supposedly offering $70 million for the rights to all of Jim Henson’s Muppet characters (excepting the “Sesame Street” crew, of course) as well as 600+ hours of TV shows and movies from the JHC’s film library.
As for the rest of the company – the Jim Henson Creature Shop as well as the corporation’s Chaplin Studio complex on LaBrea … Well, I have heard that the Mouse is taking a pass on all of that stuff this time around. All Mickey really wants are the Muppets.
Since you’ve got such great sources inside Henson as well as the Walt Disney Company, I was wondering if you could tell us what’s going on with these negotiations.
Thanks,
P.H.
Give me a couple of days in Southern California, Pete, okay? I’d like to gather a wee bit more info before I officially file a report on this proposed acquisition.
Just so you know, though: based on the stories that I’ve been hearing, the sale of the Jim Henson Company isn’t actually expected to go through ’til the end of April.
More importantly, just because the Mouse is getting the lion’s share of the press coverage right now, don’t overlook the fact that there are other entertainment companies out there — eager to swallow up Kermit & Co.
In short, P.H., Disney’s acquisition of the Muppets is far from a done deal. So don’t beak out those party hats just yet. EM.TV’s sale of the Jim Henson Company is a long and twisted saga … and it ain’t over yet. My advice is to not actually count your Miss Piggies before they’ve been poked, okay?
Alright. The flight attendant just made the “We’re descending into the San Diego area” announcement. So I guess that it would be best if I closed here. Folded away my tray table. Put my seatback in a full and upright position.
Thanks for keeping me company during the long flight out to Southern California. I promise that I’ll check in again early next week, after I get settled in with Alice and Michelle in Poway.
Oops. Almost forgot. Just prior to leaving on this trip, I found out that a few folks who had signed up for next weekend’s JHM’s Disneyland tours had to regretfully back out at the last minute. Which has left me with a couple of openings on my 10 a.m. tour on Saturday, March 22nd as well as my 2 p.m. tour on Sunday, March 23rd.
So — if you’re going to be in Southern California next weekend and would like to try and get in on the fun of the inaugural run of the JHM Disneyland tours — drop me a line at my stadlerhill@mindspring.com address and I’ll see what I can do, okay?
Well, it looks like we’re about to touch down. So I guess that’s it for today. Thanks for tagging along on my flight west.
Talk to you all again next week, okay?
jrh
General
Seward Johnson bronzes add a surreal, artistic touch to NYC’s Garment District
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
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
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
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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc.
All rights reserved
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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises, Inc. All rights
reserved
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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved
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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc.
All rights reserved
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.' "
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved
"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.
Copyright Disney
Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved
"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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved
"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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved
"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.
Copyright Disney Enterprises,
Inc. All rights reserved
"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?
Copyright Lucasfilm / Disney
Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved
"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
-
History11 months ago
The Evolution and History of Mickey’s ToonTown
-
History11 months ago
Unpacking the History of the Pixar Place Hotel
-
History11 months ago
From Birthday Wishes to Toontown Dreams: How Toontown Came to Be
-
Film & Movies8 months ago
How Disney’s “Bambi” led to the creation of Smokey Bear
-
News & Press Releases10 months ago
New Updates and Exclusive Content from Jim Hill Media: Disney, Universal, and More
-
Merchandise9 months ago
Introducing “I Want That Too” – The Ultimate Disney Merchandise Podcast
-
Theme Parks & Themed Entertainment3 months ago
Disney’s Forgotten Halloween Event: The Original Little Monsters on Main Street
-
Film & Movies3 months ago
How “An American Tail” Led to Disney’s “Hocus Pocus”