General
Why “Treasure Planet” tanked
Jim Hill explores many of the causes behind the under-performance of this recent Walt Disney Studios release.
So what IS the deal with “Treasure Planet?”
I mean, here you have a film that was crafted by Disney Feature Animation vets Ron Clements and John Musker. The directing duo that brought us “The Great Mouse Detective,” “The Little Mermaid,” “Aladdin,” and “Hercules.”
This was also the project that had master animator Glen Keane — the guy who brought Ariel to life, not to mention the Beast in “Beauty and the Beast” as well as the title characters in “Aladdin,” “Pocahontas,” and “Tarzan” — working at the very top of his game.
Then you had the infamous Walt Disney marketing department (which — if it put its mind to it — probably COULD sell ice to Eskimos) spreading the word far and wide for “Treasure Planet.”
So here you have this new Disney animated movie that the company’s top talent put together, that was being relentlessly promoted by the Mouse’s marketing machine. That seems like a surefire recipe for box office success, doesn’t it?
And yet “Treasure Planet” has been greeted with a collective shrug by American moviegoers. As of this past weekend, the film has only grossed $35,820,872.
So what exactly went wrong here? Why isn’t this movie about space-going buccaneers pulling in lots of gold for the Mouse? Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve heard dozens of theories. Some folks have suggested that “Treasure Planet” under-performed because it was actually a summer movie mistakenly released in the depth of November. Still other folks are suggesting that the Mouse made a tactical error in putting “TP” out in theaters when there were already so many strong kid-friendly films (like Warner Brother’s “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets” and Disney’s own “Santa Clause II”) out in the marketplace.
I’ve also had some industry insiders tell me that it was a grave error for the “Treasure Planet” production team to turn Jim Hawkins in an angst-ridden teen. That the film might have been a much bigger success if Disney had just followed Robert Louis Stevenson’s lead and kept Jim Hawkins a kid. (As a counter-point to this theory, I should point out that I have two 12-year old nieces — Mary and Rebecca — who absolutely love Jim Hawkins in “Treasure Planet.” They think that the brooding teen that Disney animator John Ripa dreamed up is a really cutie. Which is why they have a poster of Jim solar-surfing tacked up to their bedroom wall and why they listen to the “Treasure Planet” soundtrack constantly. So Ripa’s take on the character clearly connected with at least some members of the audience. Anyway … )
Other theories I’ve heard about the film’s failure include:
“They should have gotten a celebrity to do the voice of Long John Silver. That would have at least given Disney another way to promote the picture.”
“Pirate pictures are box office poison these days. I mean, look what happened with that Geena Davis movie, “Cutthroat Island.” That was a legendary bomb. People just don’t go in for this swashbuckling stuff anymore.” (This theory will, of course, not make the folks who are currently in the middle of post production on Disney’s “Pirates of the Caribbean,” the film that the Mouse hopes will be its big blockbuster for the Summer of 2003, very happy.)
“To put it bluntly, ‘Treasure Planet’ lacked heart. The movie itself looked great. The animation was top notch, as was the film’s design. But I never found myself getting caught up in the story. I never made an emotional connection to the characters.”
Well, certainly the comment above appears to have a bit of validity. I’ve heard from a number of animation insiders who suggest that the reason that “Lilo & Stitch” was readily embraced by moviegoers this past summer while “Treasure Planet” left would-be audience members cold was that “Lilo” had heart. That thanks to the storytelling skills of Chris Sanders, Dean Deblois and the rest of the team down at Disney Feature Animation-Florida, audiences really came to care about what happened to that lonely little Hawaiian girl and her extra terrestrial “doggie.”
Of course, to be fair, I should also point out that “Lilo & Stitch” had the benefit of one of the more innovative movie promotional campaigns that Walt Disney Studios has ever mounted. A full six months before “Stitch” officially debuted at your local multiplex, that obnoxious little alien was knocking down chandeliers in faux “Beauty and the Beast” trailers, horning in on Aladdin’s action by taking Princess Jasmine out for a joy ride in his intergalactic hot rod, hanging ten with Ariel, even subbing for Simba during his presentation at Pride Rock.
You see what I’m getting at? These teaser ads for “Lilo & Stitch” were highly effective. They made moviegoers think — long before they headed to the movie theater — that “L&S” was going to be a very different animated film from Walt Disney Studios. Which is (perhaps) why so many folks went out to the cinema last summer. To see what all the fuss was about.
Whereas “Treasure Planet” … well, that film’s promotional campaign tried very hard to give people the impression that this movie was NOT in fact “Atlantis II.” Which is why (I’m guessing) that all the advertising for “TP” seemed to prominently feature Jim Hawkins out performing dangerous stunts on his solar surfer. As if the Mouse’s marketing department had hoped that — by repeatedly highlighting this footage — extreme sports fans would have no choice but to embrace this movie.
Unfortunately, that didn’t happen. With the possible exception of my two 12-year old nieces, it didn’t seem to like there are any demographic group who embraced this film whole heartedly.
“If that’s really the case, Jim, then how did ‘Treasure Planet’ end up pulling in $35 million?,” I hear you asking. Ah, this is where it starts to get interesting, folks. According to internal Disney Studio documents that were passed along to me earlier this week, the only reason that “Treasure Planet” has done as well as it has is because of folks like you. The hardcore Disneyana fan. The big time animation buffs. It seems like you’re the only ones who actually went out of their way to catch “TP” during its initial theatrical release.
So why did the rest of the viewing public opt to take a pass on “Treasure Planet”? Again, another interesting wrinkle: according to Disney’s own marketing surveys, the number one reason that people said they were opting not to see this movie while it was in theaters was because they were eventually intending to buy “Treasure Planet” when the film came out on video or DVD.
Imagine Mickey’s horror when he learned this: that consumers had finally caught on to the Walt Disney Company’s release patterns. (As in: 3 to 9 months after every new Disney feature length animated film appears in theaters, the Mouse always puts this same film up for sale at your local Wal-Mart and/or Target in the home video or DVD format.)
Gone are the days when — if you didn’t catch a Disney animated cartoon while it was out in theaters — you’d have to wait another seven years before you got a chance to see this movie again. Nowadays, just like clockwork, the video and DVD version of every film predictably pops up for sale, just a few months after the film falls out of theaters.
You see what I’m saying here, people? The urgency is gone. Consumers are all too aware that if they miss out on taking the kids to the movies to go see the latest Disney animated feature, that it’s really no great loss.
This explains why the Walt Disney Company has been so eager to embrace the idea of exhibiting its newest animated films in the IMAX format. Thereby creating a cinematic experience (Jim Hawkins solar surfing on a screen 10 stories high!) that the typical consumer would never be able to replicate with their own home entertainment system. This plan will (hopefully) turn going out to see a new Disney film while it’s in theaters back into a special occasion again.
Sadly, this gambit didn’t seem to work with “Treasure Planet” (I.E. “TP” was the very first new Disney feature length animated film to make its debut at both conventional sized screens as well in as the large screen format on the very same day).
So what’s the Mouse going to do to try and turn this situation around? Clearly, the Walt Disney Company isn’t going to abandon its highly lucrative practice of putting its latest animated features up for sale in the home video and DVD format as soon as humanly possible. To be honest, the Mouse now relies quite heavily on the cash that it receives from the sale of these DVDs and videos to bolster the corporation’s bottom line.
I mean, why else do you think that that the home video and DVD version of “Lilo & Stitch” hit store shelves on December 3rd, a full eight weeks before this film was originally supposed to go on sale to consumers? 2002 had been a really lousy year for the Mouse House. Which is why Disney CEO Michael Eisner was counting on those pre-Christmas sales of “L&S” to help the Walt Disney Company look like it was doing a lot better than it actually was.
Anyway … clearly, something needs to be done to improve the box office performance of Disney’s newer animated films during their initial theatrical release. Some way has to be found to compel audiences to come out to their local multiplex to see these movies prior to their inevitable release on home video and DVD.
Now, a somewhat cynical person might say “Well, Jim, if the Walt Disney Company wants the theatrical audience for its newer animated films to come back, maybe the studio should start by trying to tell better stories.” Me, personally? I don’t buy that. Why? Because I think that “Treasure Planet” actually did have a pretty good story. One that moviegoers actually would have enjoyed if they’d just gotten up off of their couches and went out to their local multiplex.
But — since it’s obvious that moviegoers haven’t exactly been all that enthusiastic about the subject matter of the studio’s last few animated features — WDFA is in the process of regrouping. Mapping out different strategies for the next five to seven years worth of releases.
What sorts of different strategies? Well, one battle plan calls for Disney Feature Animation to return to its roots. Which — of course — means a return of the musical fairy tale.
After all, if “The Little Mermaid,” “Beauty and the Beast,” and “Aladdin” helped to kick-start the Second Golden Age of Disney Feature Animation, it stands to reason that another series of movies that are based on the stories of Hans Christian Anderson and the Brothers Grimm could possibly help usher in the Third Golden Age. Toward this end, WDFA currently has movies that are based on the tales of Chicken Little, Rapunzel and the Snow Queen in development.
Disney’s also looking to take advantage of any and all promotional opportunities that may come the company’s way. Take for example, WDFA’s recent decision to swap the release dates of its upcoming releases, “Home on the Range” and “Bears.”
Contrary to rumor, this move was not made because “Home on the Range” is still bedeviled with story problems. (Actually, now that Roseanne is in place to provide the voice for the film’s lead cow, I’m told that this project has finally begun to gel. And that — with a little bit of luck — “Home on the Range” may now end up being one of the funnier films that WDFA has ever produced. Here’s hoping, anyhow…) But rather, because Disney thought that they saw a primo promotional opportunity for “Bears” this fall with the upcoming release of the Platinum edition of “The Lion King.”
See if you can follow this logic: Disney reportedly feels that it will be very easy to sell people on the idea of going out to their local theater to see “Bears” this coming November if they just tack a trailer for that film onto every copy of the home video and DVD version of “The Lion King.” Evidently, the thinking in Burbank seems to be: “Hey, if people liked “The Lion King” enough to buy the Platinum Edition of that film, they’re the perfect target audience for ‘Bears.’ So let’s strike while the iron is hot.”
Another somewhat disturbing trend is — since Pixar projects like “Toy Story,” “a bug’s life,’ “Toy Story II” and “Monsters, Inc.” as well as Fox’s “Ice Age” have done so well during their theatrical releases — that executives at WDFA are reportedly flirting with the idea of abandoning traditional animation in favor of the studio making most of its upcoming feature length cartoons in the CG format.
To quote one WDFA insider: “Look, if a piece of crap like ‘Ice Age’ can make $176 million during its domestic release, while something as sensational as ‘Treasure Planet’ has to struggle to pull in $35 million, clearly audiences’ tastes have changed. So Disney has to change with the times. Otherwise, it risks losing its core audience.”
Me personally, I think that the real reason that “Ice Age” did so well this past spring wasn’t because the film was done in CG. I mean, if that was really the case, then why did “Final Fantasy” perform so miserably at the box office?
The way I see it, “Ice Age” became a hit because it was promoted so cleverly. Both in theaters (were you like me, that as soon as you saw that Scrat trailer, you knew that you just had to see this movie?) as well as with all those TV commercials that Fox had air during the 2002 Winter Olympics. But more importantly, this film had great word of mouth.
Of course, it’s easy for a movie to have great word of word when a film’s as entertaining as “Ice Age” was. Loaded with laughs and — more importantly — heart, this Blue Sky Studios production deserved every dollar that it pulled in (and whoever it was who came up with the idea of casting Ray Romano as the voice of Manny the Mammoth deserves a promotion right now).
Mind you, as you may recall reading in an earlier JimHillMedia.com column, the Walt Disney Company actually had a shot at acquiring “Ice Age” away from Fox. (Why for? Because Fox management — honestly, no joke intended here, folks — apparently got cold feet when it came to the idea of actually releasing this full length animated film.) But the Mouse took a pass on this CG project, preferring to stick with a sure thing like “Treasure Planet.”
Well — as we now all know — “Treasure Planet” wasn’t exactly a sure thing. Though this film is hardly the flop that the financial press (and the Walt Disney Company’s own management) would have you believe it is.
You see, with a project like “Treasure Planet,” it’s important to remember that — what with the money that Disney will make off of the overseas release of “TP,” plus factoring in the monies that will eventually be made off of pay-per-view, home video and DVD sales, the awarding of network broadcasting rights and the like — that the money that a movie makes off of its initial domestic release is really just the beginning. Truth be told, these days, the domestic gross only accounts for about 1/5th of a film’s eventual earning power.
So — if you can follow that math — it stands to reason that “Treasure Planet” (just like those other historic Disney under-performers like the original “Fantasia” and “Sleeping Beauty”) will eventually make some big bucks for the Mouse. This just means that the Walt Disney Company may have to wait a few years longer than it had orifinally intended before it gets a return on its $74 million (Or was it $140 million? Or even $170 million? Disney spokespeople seem to be playing extremely fast and loose these days whenever they discuss “Treasure Planet”‘s alleged production costs with the press) investment.
My apologies if this has been a somewhat more methodical — rather than emotional — discussion as to why “Treasure Planet” didn’t exactly haul in Flint’s treasure during its initial domestic release. Perhaps this has been a lot drier story than you were expecting. My apologies. But my goal here was to avoid much of the histrionics that currently surround most discussions of this movie.
“What histrionics am I talking about?” Well, get on Google and type in “Disney Treasure Planet.” I’m sure — if you poke around long enough — you’ll eventually come across some website where the “TP” conspiracy theorists are at play. These are the folks who will tell you about how the Walt Disney Company deliberately torpedoed “Treasure Planet” so that it would make it that much easier for the corporation to abandon traditional animation entirely. So that the studio would now have a solid excuse for its decision to totally CG in the not-so-distant future.
This sort of talk (and I’m trying to be polite here) is patently ridiculous, people. Why for? Because real life isn’t like “The Producers” — where people deliberately create a flop with the hope that they’ll be able to profit from this project someday further on down the line.
This is especially true of the crew over at Walt Disney Feature Animation, where people sometimes labor for five, six or seven years to complete production of an individual animated feature. These guys pour all their art and energy into these films because they sincerely hope that the project will eventually connect with an audience. When that doesn’t happen … there’s broken hearts up and down the food chain. From the executive who actually greenlit production of the picture right down to the assistant clean-up artist who made sure that Doppler’s glasses looked the same all the way through the film.
When you get right down to it, I guess there really isn’t a single easy answer as to why “Treasure Planet” failed to catch on with moviegoers during its initial domestic release. But then … sometimes things like this just happen in Hollywood. Good animated movies — great ones, even — get inexplicably overlooked. I mean, look what happened to “Cats Don’t Dance” and “The Iron Giant.” Both wonderful movies that died a dog’s death at the box office … all because audiences wouldn’t come out to see them.
Anywho … in the ugly aftermath of “Treasure Planet”‘s under-performance, I’m honestly hoping that execs at WDFA will at least do the smart thing. Which is NOT to blame Ron Clements and John Musker for what happened with their movie. Because if Disney were to ever make the mistake of letting Ron’n’John walk out the door (when you just know that Jeffrey Katzenberg and the team over at Dreamworks SKG would greet these guys with open arms) … well, it would be a tragedy right up there with Disney letting the Brizzi brothers and Eric Goldberg get away.
Speaking of Dreamworks … I’ve heard from a variety of sources that folks over at that studio aren’t taking much pleasure in “Treasure Planet”‘s difficulties at the domestic box office. Why for? Because Dreamworks’ next traditionally animated film — “Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas” — has been described as “‘Treasure Planet’ without the flying pirate ships.” Which is why I hear that Dreamworks execs are now desperately casting about for a bold new ad campaign to help sell this picture.
What’s the problem with the old campaign? Well, have you seen the initial teaser poster for “Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas?” It features a silhouette of Sinbad hanging off of the mast of his ship. Which bears a striking resemblance to the final version of the “Treasure Planet” poster that Disney’s marketing staff created for that movie.
Dreamworks execs are reportedly worried that — if the posters for these two pictures actually look the same — moviegoers may end up confusing the two movies. Which means that “Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas” could end up suffering the same fate as “Treasure Planet.”
Will “Sinbad” end up under-performing just like “TP?” Well, we’ll know for sure come June 27th when this Dreamworks picture finally sails into view at your local multiplex.
Anyway … hopefully, this piece shed some light on all the controversies that are currently swirling around Disney’s “Treasure Planet.”
Soooo … what’s your take on the situation?
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
-
History10 months ago
Unpacking the History of the Pixar Place Hotel
-
History10 months ago
The Evolution and History of Mickey’s ToonTown
-
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
-
Merchandise8 months ago
Introducing “I Want That Too” – The Ultimate Disney Merchandise Podcast
-
Theme Parks & Themed Entertainment2 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”